Racist Obama AG Exposed
US Attorney General Eric Holder has blocked the DOJ from prosecution black men based on anti-white, pro-black racism.
During the 2008 election, three Black Panther members -- Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson guarded a voting place and used baseball bats to threaten white people to prevent white voters from voting. The criminal violations were observed and video taped by news reporters. During the final days of the Bush administration the Justice Department filed civil rights charges against the thugs who had committed obvious crimes. Using threats and/or intimidation to stop people from voting is a clear violation of US election laws.
The US Attorney in charge of the criminal prosecution was J. Christian Adams. He was told to stop the prosecution because the new DOJ policy is to avoid criminal prosecution of black criminals. Mr. Adams recently resigned from the DOJ and has gone public with the story. The story of anti-white racism in the DOJ has been reported by FOX News but is being avoided by AP, CBS, CNN, NBC, and the other racist media.
When he announced dismissal of the criminal charges against the Black Panther thugs, Deputy Attorney General Thomas Perez provided false testimony in May to the United States Commission on Civil Rights denying racist reasons for refusing to prosecute black men for criminal civil rights violations. There is good reason to believe that Pretender Obama has involved in the decision to base justice on race rather than on law. Its part of the “CHANGE” that voters were promised.
If you are white, do not be tempted to think that you will get a fair trial in the US under a racist anti-white government, nor will you be protected from black racist thug gangs. That is the new order, the “CHANGE” in America.
During the 2008 election, three Black Panther members -- Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson guarded a voting place and used baseball bats to threaten white people to prevent white voters from voting. The criminal violations were observed and video taped by news reporters. During the final days of the Bush administration the Justice Department filed civil rights charges against the thugs who had committed obvious crimes. Using threats and/or intimidation to stop people from voting is a clear violation of US election laws.
The US Attorney in charge of the criminal prosecution was J. Christian Adams. He was told to stop the prosecution because the new DOJ policy is to avoid criminal prosecution of black criminals. Mr. Adams recently resigned from the DOJ and has gone public with the story. The story of anti-white racism in the DOJ has been reported by FOX News but is being avoided by AP, CBS, CNN, NBC, and the other racist media.
When he announced dismissal of the criminal charges against the Black Panther thugs, Deputy Attorney General Thomas Perez provided false testimony in May to the United States Commission on Civil Rights denying racist reasons for refusing to prosecute black men for criminal civil rights violations. There is good reason to believe that Pretender Obama has involved in the decision to base justice on race rather than on law. Its part of the “CHANGE” that voters were promised.
If you are white, do not be tempted to think that you will get a fair trial in the US under a racist anti-white government, nor will you be protected from black racist thug gangs. That is the new order, the “CHANGE” in America.
Labels: American Injustice System, conspiracy, Constitution, Criminal Gangs, Muslims, Obama, Obamanation
posted by Bob | Thursday, July 01, 2010
246 Comments:
I came from a very stupid, racist family. In 1957 I read a book that changed my views forever. It was BLACK LIKE ME, written by a white newspaper editor who died himself to look like blacks, traveled around the South,then wrote of his experiences.
My wives have both been imports, Hispanic women. When I discovered my family was making racist remarks about my wife and kids, I disowned the stupid bastards.
I hear people say, "You can choose your friends, but you can't choose your family." I correct them in certain terms.
Much of my life has been in a multi-ethnic environment. My wife's best friend since 1965 has been a black woman my kids call Grandma and mean it.
Over the years I saw racism among whites drop dramatically. More of an acceptance of reality than perhaps developing new attitudes.
As white racism dropped, and few problems existed, the racism among blacks soared. This family, of my kids "Grandma" became negative and hostile. When we visited them, I could see them parsing every word; every comma; every period; apparently hoping to find some form of racism in my words.
Finally, three or four years ago, when her SIL learned I was on the Atkins Diet (very successfully, I might add) he picked a fight with me, in his house on Thanksgiving, telling me over and over anyone who did any sort of diet is STUPID. And, he managed to make my wife; my daughter; his wife; and his MIL all think I had started a fight with him. He ordered me out of his house, and I had no where to go but walk in the rain for a couple of hours. I am done with them all. I did go back to Grandma's once, but now, never again. I don't treat people that way, and I am not going to tolerate it when people treat me that way.
The one thing that pisses me off most, even more than the insane claim we owe every black person a million dollars, for people who were never slaves, to be paid by people who never owned slaves, is the claim that only whites can be racist. That is just about the most racist thing I have ever heard, and I have heard a lot of racism in my life.
I don't give a damn what color a person's skin is. However, increasingly black people do.
This is one of the reasons I am happy in Mexico. There is almost no racism here. Oh, sure, from time to time a Ph. D. in Ethnic Studies (now, there's a real important career) will come down and as planned, discover the descendants of slaves living in the jungles of Vera Cruz just as their ancestors lived 400 years ago, and report that blacks are discriminated against in Mexico, because they don't make as much money living in jungle huts as engineers and computer scientists in the cities make.
The only time since October I have seen another Anglo was when I went to the Immigration Office to renew my papers. I am content living this way. These people are essentially good people, once you understand their culture -- and get good locks on your doors, heh, heh.
Apologies to non-faith readers here. But, the Mexican people are at least nominally, if not practically, religious. I tell them I know why God made people of different colors. Outside my wife's kitchen window, she has flowers of all colors. Red; yellow; blue; pink, white. Why? Because she thinks all those different colors are pretty. Just so God made humans of all colors because He thinks all those colors are pretty.
And, as soon as He made the colors, people started saying, "My color is more important than yours."
And, today, it's "Your color is more evil than my color."
Enough already.
Another reason to Get The Hell Out. There are so many.
Anonymous age 68
I uploaded a posting, which OpenOffice says has 3564 characters, smaller than the usual 4096 limit. I got a page which says it was too big to process, but also the return page said it was saved for blogger approval. I will try again if it does not appear.
Anonymous age 68
Age 68, are Mexicans celebrating the 4th of July? Here in the border states they expect us to celebrate Cindo de Mayo, and to take care of all their excess people. Seems like they ought to be jazzed about the 4th.
Actually, today is election day. All bars closed. No alcoholic beverages sold in stores for several days.
I have a non-mainstream view of their excess people. US women have decided not to have babies, which means we will cease being a mostly white nation.
We either become a Hispanic nation, or a Muslim nation. Maybe Chinese, who knows?
As much hated as Mexicans are in the US, history will almost certainly show that going Mexican would be much better than the other choices.
As a nation, we tend to be very present oriented, so we aren't planning that far ahead, and will pay dearly for it.
The answer is not accepting illegals, but accepting legals in large numbers. Many of the problems with illegals exist only because they are illegal, much like marijuana.
Just one example is the tendency of Mexican criminals to sneak into the US to avoid Mexican prisons, and live with the illegals, then the illegals don't dare call the cops to take them away because they will also be taken away. This means a lot of crime, which is blamed on those who don't want to be involved in crime.
Still, in the US we debate, then vote, so the nation has spoken.
Anonymous age 68
There may be a medical cure for feminism.
http://www.newser.com/story/94423/critics-say-doc-using-drug-to-make-girls-girly.html
In May somewhere in California some highschoolers were sent home for wearing American flag t-shirts on Cinco de Mayo. Apparently the mexican students were offended by them so the students got sent home for being American instead of mexican that day.
Muslims invented algebra. mexicans don't invent anything.
>>Mexicans don't invent anything...
If you say don't invent anything that is especially important now, that might be correct. The potato (eaten any French Fries lately?) came from this part of the world.
So did corn.
Actually, the Aztecs had effective astronomy when my Irish ancestors were probably still living on hovels. They lost because they did astronomy while our ancestors made guns and gun powder, which I think was invented by the Chinese, not sure.
However, why pick on Mexico? If you get a good map based on the number of inventions, you will find almost all of them are in the Snow zone, where it gets hot in the summer and really cold in the winter.
There are virtually no inventions of consequence closer to the equator. The blow pipe; the poison dart; shrunken heads.
And, if you do some more checking, you will find most important inventions in modern times were invented by the group which is now the most hated group of people on the planet.
WHITE MALES.
Don't cuss me out. Check it out. And, now the people in charge are deliberately and systematically destroying the white males.
Is it coincidence that the people in the cold zone are white, or is it more that people with white skins with high light absorption tend to be more healthy in the snow zone, thus able to invent more things? Your opinion is as good as anyone's.
The man in charge of the most important development in the last 100 years did it mostly in Mexico. Development of good crops was so effective that it is claimed he saved at least a billion lives, the greatest development in modern times. And, I think it was done in two places, both in Mexico. I think one research farm was in the Sonora, and I know for a fact one is in Texcoco, in the Valley of Mexico City.
So, who did it? His name was Norman Borlaug, a white man from Iowa, who won the Nobel Prize for it. I only found two people in Mexico who had heard of him when he died last year. One of them was an agricultural chemical salesman who went to school on the Texcoco farm and got to talk to him.
This is fact, not racism. My hero when I was a kid in the 50's was a man named George Washington Carver. If you need something interesting to read, get hold of a biography of GWC. He was not white.There are not many like him.
Anonymous age 68
White men from cold zones aren't invading the US in millions and demanding free education for their kids and citizenship for themselves as a reward for breaking US laws.
July 06, 2010 10:06 AM
That's correct. I am glad you understood my posting.
Anonymous age 68
An additional comment here, clearly it is not white males who enter the US illegally, of course. Well, they do, but not in large numbers.
However, several years ago, a Mexican government official was quoted as saying there were an estimated 400,000 North Americans living and working illegally in Mexico.
My niece's husband is one of them. He runs to the border to get a 180 day tourist permit, then runs back to Mexico City to run his marginally successful business. Illegally.
And, a few years ago, I was in contact with a North American woman, who lived for a while in a really bad house a block or two from my house in Mexico City. Her boy friend (I always assume fat hog when a NA woman has a Mexican boy friend) had TB of the bone, she ran out of money, and paid the rent; food; and medicine by selling candy and gum on the street buses. No one ever asked her for i.d.
For some years, it might be said I was also living here illegally. I had a valid tourist permit, it is true. However, one is not supposed to simply live in Mexico on a tourist permit. Where I am, no one cares. When I became a legal resident, I told people, "Soy legal!" They laughed, but then universally said no one cares out here as long as I treat people well.
From time to time, on Mexico forums, someone will say, "My tourist permit expired 8 years ago. What do I do?"
I assume those are women, who can get by with murder, and can always find someone to feed them for lying flat on their back, and men can't do that. They have to work, which is another ball game altogether.
My point here is when the circumstances are correct, almost everyone, white or brown, will do immigration things that are not exactly legal if it suits them. There are just more Mexicans who find the circumstances correct for them at this time. If the economy for men continues as it is, we may see a flood of white men into Mexico, heh, heh.
I want to repeat what I have said many times. I wish no Mexicans would come into the US as illegals. There is no one who can say I did anything but discourage them from Going North. It is risky and dangerous in many ways. Seldom do I get my way, nor do you, or we would not be dominated by insane feminists.
Anonymous age 68
Man holds Mother hostage at gunpoint; orders her to iron his clothing because it is woman's work:
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/24173668/detail.html
Mother later escaped unharmed; son sits in jail.
>>Mother later escaped unharmed; son sits in jail.
This is significant because?
I am serious. To post this news item, it was obviously important to you, and since I don't see it as significant, except demonstrating the Darwin Effect, please explain it to me.
Unless, of course, this is a feminist who believes this moron represents all men, in which case go pound sand.
My clothes don't need ironing. Male ingenuity some years ago invented a wonderful thing called Permanent Press, and ironing is obsolete except for company executives, who hire maids to do it. Or, maybe the Trophy Wife makes a laundry run once a week in her Beemer on her way to meet the pool boy at a cheap motel.
Permanent press is supposed to be spun dry to activate, but on my roof, the breezes do the job very well.
Since ironing is obsolete, this also helped make the wife obsolete unless one wants kids. Or, has religious hang-ups about non-marital sex, of course.
Anonymous age 68
What a loser. 29 and still living with his parents? Pathetic. But I guess this is one way to get the useless lump out of Mommy's house at long last. Maybe in jail he can learn a little independence.
The only thing we need those cunts for is ot FUCK'EM!!!
OBAMA IS SATAN YES WE CAN IN BACKWARDS TALK FROM HIM! LOOK IT UP ON YOUTUBE!!!
Actually the young man who ordered his Mother to do chores shouldn't have been jailed - even if he did hold a loaded gun to her.
The mother should consider heself lucky to have such a son. Since he is unmarried and still living at home, Mother should care for his needs.
Like a baby? Some of us have a different view of being a man. Why is he at home anyway? . Men grow up and find their own place. If the economy won't hire men, some will have to live at home, but at his age he is not a helpless baby. What a sorry view of being a man. Go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
In many traditional societies the family home is multi-generational. The eldest son is expected to eventually take over ownership and management of the family home.
It is also traditional for the oldest mother to be the primary female responsible for daily operations of the home and care for the men who live there, including supervision of younger wives of her sons.
Good point, Bob. I am in a somewhat similar traditional society, and I know a number of extended households like that. However, seldom will it be an adult man's mother who is expected to iron his clothes in an extended household. If he has no wife, unmarried sisters will do chores like that. Or, other women, including married sisters or wives of brothers.
And, also in a traditional society he is expected to be working. They find something for him to do, even if only sit under a tree to tend goats in the fields, not just sit around on his lazy arse and demand things from his own mother. I am not sure what would happen to a man who treated his mother that way; it would not be pleasant.
Of course, what happens in a traditional society is not especially relevant in the US.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonmous, age 68:
In many parts of the US there are older homes built in the 19th century and early 20th century that were built large to accomodate extended families. The change to a so-called "nuclear family" in the 20th century was step one on the road to the destruction of families entirely. Part of the change was driven by the industrial revolution and its appitite for factory workers in big cities. A big part was driven by feminists, gays, and other liberals who hate families and have long worked to destroy them.
In a traditional family the eldest son is expected to be working in the family farm or business, not leaving home to pursue some far off life in a cheap bungalow.
Come on. It's pretty obvious that the guy has some serious mental problems. I mean, pulling a gun over something that trivial? He might be retarded or whatever the PC name for it is and his parents are letting him live at home to keep him out of some squalid group home. Or he's a head case and they're trying to keep him out of the funny farm. Georgia is a pretty poor state and I imagine their mental health facilities are pretty substandard.
If he is just a lazy douchebag then yeah maybe jail will do him some good and give his parents an opportunity to throw him out permanently. But if he's mental, he needs treatment and maybe now he'll get it.
Note to anonymous:
Its pretty obvious that you have serious mental problems about men and freedom. Your psycho tirade criticizing a man while supporting police state tyranny and blue gun thugs is out of place here among free men.
Another home run, Bob
What I was told by old-timers in farming country was that on an extended family farm, the extended family helped keep peace between husband and wife if there was friction. If they were angry, the men would lead him away, and the women would talk to her, until they calmed down.
And, I assume we all know that women don't always act the same with witnesses around.
Anonymous age 68
>>not just sit around on his lazy arse and demand things from his own mother.
Correction to my own posting, sorry. They do have single moms here, too, so there will be men sitting on their lazy arses, demanding their mothers do something for them. Not many, though. Single moms do not get a check from the government to produce more future convicts.
Recently, for the first time, I got a chance to talk to a prison guard who works at the penitentiary a few miles away. I told him in the US most prisoners came from female headed households. He said it was the same here.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous (4:27 PM)
I deleted your post for violating Bob's rules for comments.
The man in that news story was probably a bastard raised by a single mother. It is a plan for failure. The mother got what she deserved, what she created. The boy was brought into a life of failure. Blame lies with the feminist mother.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200807/men-do-everything-they-do-in-order-get-laid-iii
Is it good that the other men pull the husband away from the wife, defending her? Why would the husband keep such people in his home? He has no choice under traditional rules. The man is never the master, human society is run by women's choices.
Note to anonymous: (5:00 AM)
Your article from Psychology Today is total bunk. "Imagine for a moment" if psychobabble was anything other than nonsense? Their "simple thought experiment" has no valid basis other than their twisted imagination.
In physical reality females, not men, carry the physical results of competition to be selected. Exaggerated female breasts, for example, are an evolutionary response to being the sex that gets selected, not the sex that does the selecting. So are exaggerated wide hips on human females. The psychobabbly bigots can do all the "thought experiments" they like and it doesn't change the obvious biology staring them in the face.
Of course every female knows it too. The fake boob industry is booming. She needs bigger ones to compete for men.
You don't really believe psychobabble rubbish like that do you?
Batting one thousand, this week, Bob!
This clown on PT is projecting, which tells us he probably doesn't get any more than the rest of us. Maybe less.
Think about it. Janitors and truck drivers are often married and have sex. So, why would Bill Gates have to be a billionaire to get sex when poor men do? Seems a bit irrational, though I assume the PT guy could generate millions of words defending his sorry theory.
Though it's a minor point, Tiger Woods could tell himself in the morning, "I am getting laid today," and be right.
So could a lot of athletes.
So can a lot of gamesters with little money.
So can men married to good women who also have honor. These are usually women who marry young and stay married.
My view is a bit different. Sex is good, but man honor comes first.
So, what is man honor? Well, probably what I think it is, heh, heh.
Honor means not having to grovel for (mediocre) sex.
Honor means not risking STD's, and permanent harm to my body, for (mediocre) sex.
Honor means a high probability of being able to help raise any children I sire.
Honor means the woman I have sex with also has honor when we have sex. Anything else is just poking it in whatever is handy.
Honor means other things to other men, but I suspect the percentage of honorable sex for men in the US is sinking fast.
Anonymous age 68
AND YOU THOUGHT YOU HAD IT BAD WITH A BLACK CUNT!
http://www.henrymakow.com/new_aussie_pm_is_communist_les.html
read it wanna come to Australia now!!
I believe that women certainly do the selecting today and in the past. They select who they will marry, who they will divorce, and who they will send to jail for domestic abuse or rape. They do the chosing, and I don't know really of a time in history where they did not do the choosing, at least amongst their own culture. There always were men from /other/ tribes who would come in and rape the women and enslave them, but such things were always punished by death if a man within any culture did that to one of his culture's women. Women's choice is enshrined in all law systems as just as sacrosanct as life, the penalty for taking either is death. That's how it was and how it is now, if you can't accept women doing the choosing and you being punished if you decide to do things your own way you might as well kill yourselves as you will never be happy. Rapists are hung or imprisoned. Child rapists, those men, some among your number, who have sex with girls under the age of majority, are killed or imprisoned for life. If you have a problem with that go kill yourself as it is not changing and you will never have the young girl you so desperately wish to rule over and own. It's not happening anywhere in the world.
Note to anonymous (8:48 AM)
There is no point in demonstrating your ignorance further. Females spend huge sums on fancy clothes, makeup, boob jobs, etc., BECAUSE they have to parade themselves and attract men hoping out be selected. Men get away with wearing old jeans because WE MEN do the selecting. Clear evidence is built into female bodies because they have been competing to be selected so long that they now have evolutionary display adaptations.
"The women all get prettier at closing time" because the men are left with the females who have not already been selected. And, of course, the fat ugly females don't even bother going out on parade, they won't get picked.
Get off the feminist kool aid and wise up.
"We Men" as a group may do the selecting, but I do not. I cannot, because of female choice and feminist law. I cannot choose the girl I want. That is reality. And she always has the choice to say no, or to say yes and later dump me, to have me arrested. There are also a myriad of laws restricting which ranges of women men can attempt to convince, this is to strengthen the female choice of the older women and the cougars. If female choice didn't exist none of us would be here complaining, we would have picked up whatever girl we wanted so long as she had not been taken by another man beforhand.
Men ask women. They don't just act. They ask beg plead and pay first. The female chooses.
Females parade themselves to be selected by the 1/2 of the male population that they like, and they can always say NO if the wrong man likes them, and the state automatically says NO when a man wants a girl that's too young to be independent.
You and I, we cannot have the type of wife we would want. It is banned. Furthermore women can and do say NO and this is enforced even when they are not with any man. Women can and do dump their boyfriends and husbands. Women do say NO to their husbands.
Men get "lucky". If you rely on luck you are not the chooser. You choose to play the game, yes, but you do not choose the winner. Women do. Female choice is real.
Men compete for women. The best hunter, the most proficient farmer, the bravest warriors all got the most desirable females. It's that way in mammals. Males compete for the right to pass on their genes. Nature is very cruel in that way. Offering a good and stable home works very well. Females instinctively want a safe place to rear their offspring, so a good hearted man can easily out-compete a bastard when looking for a wife. But in selecting a mate for only sex rather than marriage females prefer tall, muscular men who look like they can fight off potential attackers, defend and provide. Men prefer females who are attractive and look fertile. It's simple biology. So the short overweight guy in a bar won't have the same chances as the handsome six-footer and the ugly fat chick won't have the same luck as the leggy blonde on the next barstool. Nature isn't kind, but it is predictable.
To 11:19 and 11:25 whom I assume is the same poster, learn to compete. You don't get to just point a finger and say "I'll take that one." You have to be able to compete with other men who want her too. It's just the way nature made things.
>>Child rapists, those men, some among your number, who have sex with girls under the age of majority, are killed or imprisoned for life.
Not sure, but I think you are lying. There is no evidence that I know of that anyone on this blog has ever raped or had sex with any underage female at all. If you have any such evidence, spit it out, and I bet they won't be on this blog for many years. Otherwise, go pound sand.
We did have a man who has fantasies of such a world, and even he has admitted repeatedly that he will never have it. He is either gone or much calmed down. Can't you tell the difference between fantasies and reality? We can.
There are several men here and I am one of them, who believe when young women are ready for sexual activity, as many are as young as 13, it makes more sense for them to marry an older man who will care for her and the children and make for a stable society and a good life for her.
The current feminist system assumes no girl is ready and willing to have sex until she is 18 or 40 or something. The result is many young women with children living in dire straits, in poverty, and seeing their offspring die in gunfights and on Death Row.
We know this marrying them off when they are sexually ready is not feasible at this time. Here is Bob's disclaimer:
Legal Notice
All posts of Bob are rhetorical in nature only, and should not be construed in any other manner. Bob does not advocate insurrection, sedition, murder, violence, assault, or any other criminal or illegal acts. All opinions on this site are protected political speech under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution.
I apologize, Bob, if copying copyrighted material from your blog to your blog offends you. But, apparently your less intelligent readers have not read your entire blog page.
I concur with Bob on this, and do not even advocate "three over" on the Interstate. My advice is obey all laws to the best of your ability, or Get The Hell Out. I write from Mexico...
###
Now as to who choses, men or women? Both sides of the argument have some merit. But, Bob is more right.
Women do get the final say when a choice CAN be made.
The problem is, before a choice CAN be made, men have to take an interest in being chosen. Women have to do certain things before a man will even enter the choice process, which Bob describes very well.
One of the biggest problems among women in their 30's and older today is almost no one is interested in being chosen.
At least no one the woman wants. Which means the best men are also saying NO! Once the men all say no, the woman has no choice. My heart bleeds!
Another way of saying what you are saying is, "I have the pussy so I make the rules."
That attitude is the reason so many older women can't find any men to choose from.
Most men who say NO! to being chosen are men who were badly treated by women when they did want to be chosen. Good men will only take so much crap, and then they choose not be chosen.
Many observers have reported that a great majority of women, like the pigs grunting and squealing when I slopped them on my father's farm in the 50's, all want to choose the same small minority of men.
That small minority of men mostly want to use and lose women. Tsk, tsk.
Then when that majority of women who have rejected the majority of good men while becoming infected with every known STD while banging the same guys as all the other women do, want to settle down and get married, there aren't enough men who haven't been rejected to the giving up point.
Women who think they have all the power eventually end up facing the harsh truth.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
Men compete with other men to decide who gets first choice of females. Looser men have to pick from the left over women that didn't get selected by the top men.
That is quite different from females who gussy themselves all up, and develop evolutionary augmented sexual displays, and then parade in groups and lines hoping that some man will notice and pick her.
In modern western society females have the option to refuse a man's selection of her, but that is far, far from being the one doing the selection. If she refuses very many she won't get taken. She does not have a real option to go out and pick a man. She has to parade in her "war paint" hoping a man she likes will pick her.
The psychobabble nonsense argued that females do the selecting, which demonstrates a level of ignorance and stupidity unprecedented even from the shrinks.
>>You have to be able to compete with other men who want her too. It's just the way nature made things.
Again, both sides of an argument have some merit.
Finding a mate is not that easy for men or women. Women also have to compete for the man they want. And, it is also true women cannot just point at the man they want and take him.
In a once moral society, there were enough men and women that almost anyone who wanted to marry, could do so. Sure, every man wanted the most desirable woman, and every woman wanted the most desirable man.
But, most men and most women had an idea where they stood in the competition. The pot-bellied ditch digger never thought to mate with the beautiful, rich girl, beyond a passing fantasy. But, the rich guy could have a rough choice of any woman on the social spectrum that attracted him. Most rich guys ended up with educated women from their own social class, though.
Except for extremely beautiful women from the lower social levels, people tended to end up near their own level, not only in appearance, but in education and socioeconomic factors as well. Which meant most men and women found mates that suited them somewhat. (I don't think women have ever been totally satisfied. That is not their nature.)
Today, even the fat; ugly women expect a fair chance at Mr. Big, and blame all men when it doesn't happen.
In moral times, things sorted themselves out rather well. A poor kid with a low paying job got a wife usually from his own social level, in most cases she knew how to cook and do domestic chores and shovel his ashes. She didn't expect to marry Mr. Big so took a man at her own level at the first marrying age and stayed married in most cases.
Today, due to promiscuous sex, the most undesirable women think they can marry with Mr. Two Piece Suit And Beemer. They are the ones who invented the bogus concept of pointing at the one you want and getting him. That has never been how it works, nor is it how it works today. I love their screams of agony and despair when they realize it will never be, and they won't even have a man of their own level. I think it's called the Wile E. Coyote Minute.
In spite of all the insults cast at Nice Guys by both men and women, I want to tell you folks something really important. NICE GUYS ARE HOT IN MEXICO.
In the US, you had better be willing to learn advanced auto-erotic techniques, because that is the fate of a Nice Guy.
In Mexico, and a number of other family-oriented countries, a potential mate has to get past the parents; and grand-parents; and brothers and sisters and aunts and uncles who know all the tricks.
Good women know from a young age any man who will get family approval HAS to be A NICE GUY.
I am 68, and once a year get hit on hard by an attractive women. In the past 4 years the average age is around 20, but most are around 21.
And, no, these are not the First Wave of opportunists and gold-diggers North Americans encounter. These are women who know me and to put it frankly, want to jump into bed with me.
All this bogus jazz about men wanting younger women being perverts has missed up brains in the US. Here women are attracted to older men, as long as they are Nice Guys.
Anonymous age 68
>>In modern western society females have the option to refuse a man's selection of her, but that is far, far from being the one doing the selection. If she refuses very many she won't get taken. She does not have a real option to go out and pick a man. She has to parade in her "war paint" hoping a man she likes will pick her.
Bob wins again!
There are a very few very clever, very evil women who can make it happen. The one-legged whore was one, but Sir Paul seems to have learned his lesson very well. His kids all like the women he took after the Pegleg whore.
Anonymous age 68
"You and I, we cannot have the type of wife we would want."
Why not? I got the one I wanted. And yeah, the guy who said we have to compete for them was right and I'm not tall and I'm sure as hell not handsome. But there's more to it than that so don't give up if you're not exactly Brad Pitt. There's plenty of great women out there and if one dumps you go for another one. There's not a shortage.
Add me to the happily married but ugly list. I am tall. 6' 6" to be exact, and built like a redhaired scarecrow. But that leggy blond on the barstool? Try asking her to dance. Bet she's dealt with a few assholes and might give you a shot on the chance that you're better than that. Good women are looking for good men and your looks are not a problem. Or in my case the leggy brunet. And all the kids got her good looks but my red hair. Can't win everything, but my daughter love her hair so it's all good. Don't give up if you're not the vampire thing that all the girls are crazy for. Good women want good men, not some handsome asshole.
I am glad to hear y'all got good women. But, what you are doing is what is called, "I GOT MINE!!!"
The implied subordinate clause is, "...if you can't get yours, there is something wrong with you or you are doing something wrong." Correct?
Forty percent of first marriages end up in divorce, and let me add the principal cause of those divorces is female adultery, not anything the man did wrong. That means sixty percent do not end up in divorce. The fact the sixty percent don't divorce does absolutely nothing for the forty percent who have had their lives torn apart by man-fault divorce.
Likewise, we all know some men find good wives. It is a virtual statistical impossibility for 100% of men to not find good wives, no matter how bad things are.
That does no good to the men who have had such horrible experiences they have stopped having anything to do with women.
And, there are millions of such men. (Rutgers University).
I cannot speak for you, but I can tell you the vast majority of men who say things like you say, also BELIEVE that any man who has bad things happen to him, deserves it. Therefore, they don't care what happens to other men.
Men like this are so stupid, I had men call me (when I was doing counseling,) who told me they had no intention of helping other men fight the system. "They all deserve what happened to them. I don't. They should all stop and help me."
One guy called me one night, and took two hours of my time, with me explaining how the system worked and what he had to do to attempt to minimize the damage.
When we were done, he told me, "You know, this is your fault."
I was used to dealing with dumb f**ks, so I just told him, "Tell me more."
He said, "I don't know what you did, but it's guys like you who make it bad for the rest of us."
He was so stupid he imagined a militant activist must have committed serial rape or something. He had no idea that only someone with absolutely no dirt on him at all could survive three days as an activist for men without being crucified.
We talked some more and the DF had actually beat up his wife, but only a little bit, doncha' know?
And, he committed adultery, but only a little bit, doncha' know?
But he assumed it was vicious brutes like me that stopped a wife-beater, panderer, from getting custody of his kids.
From your tone, I think you mean well. Trying to encourage others not to give up hope, etc.
Perhaps you don't know that in MRA circles, telling me, "Just keep trying, it will come out all right." is VERY offensive. It not only patronizes men who actually know very well what has happened to them. It also implies the millions of men who want nothing to do with the modern woman just don't know what they are doing.
I have been married to a Mexican woman for 35 years this month. Even at 68 our marriage is not sexless, unlike 22% if marriages in the US.
I learned enough from my 10,000 hours of activism / counseling that I am living in Mexico, and it's a whole different world here.
I not only don't have to put up with insane North American women. I also don't have to put up with dumb f**k American men. The only reason I am here is called Operation Rescue, to get men to save themselves by Getting The Hell Out. Quite a few men have left, thanks to my encouragement. One major MRA board virtually shut down after Admin and all his moderators heard the word and left the country.
Anonymous age 68
"but my daughter love her hair so it's all good."
Can I have your daughter?
"Good women want good men, not some handsome asshole."
Used women want good men, when they're done with the men they actually like.
>>There's plenty of great women out there and if one dumps you go for another one. There's not a shortage.
The funniest part of this is you are serious.
I get men to make one visit to Mexico, and they start making exit plans, not necessarily to Mexico, but to one of the male-friendly nations
Did you know you can tell the American women from the Mexican women ten meters away by the pissed-off look on the AW face? Great women don't have pissed-off looks on their faces.
Also AW have the highest need for psychiatric and psychological treatments of any nation in the world. There was another study a few weeks ago reporting AW are also the unhappiest women on the planet.
Anonymous age 68
"what you are doing is what is called, "I GOT MINE!!!""
I think what you are doing is called "if you stay in the US you are INSANE!!!"
I'm sure you believe it. It sounds like you've done your time in counseling. But not everybody wants to leave family and friends, a good job, a home, etc. Some of us like it in the US. And there are plenty of good women for us.
"But he assumed it was vicious brutes like me that stopped a wife-beater, panderer, from getting custody of his kids."
Yes, this is truly a dumb fuck. You beat your wife and cheat on her, odds are she'll call a lawyer. Don't blame her. If she cheats, call one of your own. Marriage vows should be obeyed, and no, I'm not religious at all. I just believe in honor. I have no idea why this fool blamed you for his troubles. I hope you showed him a mirror and told him where to look for the truth.
"From your tone, I think you mean well. Trying to encourage others not to give up hope, etc."
Thank you. Right on the nose. I met a few gold-digging nasty bitches on the road. It makes me appreciate my wife even more.
"Perhaps you don't know that in MRA circles, telling me, "Just keep trying, it will come out all right." is VERY offensive."
Sorry about that. But not everybody wants to pull up stakes and expat. I didn't and don't. My family is here, my friends are here, my life is here. For you it sounds like Mexico is a good place to be. I've visited several times and it is NOT the place for me. Others may feel the same so "get the hell out" isn't feasible for them. And not all American women are insane. Some, sure. Just like some of my students are lazy, immature, substance-abusing assholes who can't be bothered to write a two-page essay without plagiarizing off the Web. It doesn't mean all of them are like that. Most aren't. It's not fair to the rest to lump them in with the losers, no matter how tempting it is. Most of my students are honest and work hard, it's just the assholes who stand out. Assholes tend to do that.
For you, leaving the US was the best option. I'm glad you were able to do it and have a happy, prosperous life in Mexico with a wife you love and a life that's what you want. We should all have that. I do, in the US. I like it here and I love my wife and kids, my job, my house, and my city. Others can have the same thing, in the US or Mexico or Sweden or Madagascar or wherever. Emigrating an option but it's not the only one. Not giving up is the key, wherever you do it.
"Can I have your daughter?"
No. She'll make her own choice when she's ready.
Yep, you are saying, "I got mine."
And, yep, I am saying, "if you stay in the US you are INSANE!!!" Although I usually prefer to be much nicer, and say, "if you live in the US and aren't working on an exit plan, you are an idiot!!!"
I am reminded of something else that often happened when I was doing counseling.
From time to time, some 'man' would come across the factory where I 'worked', to find me and tell me on company time what a pathetic, sorry, example of humanity I was. In great detail. For picking on those absolutely wonderful women who were so kind and faithful and loving and nice. And, of course, they'd tell me how wonderful their own wives were and now good their life was.
The funny part was eventually everyone of those men got his papers. And, when they did, guess who they called for advice? Um, you guessed. The minute their privates were on the chopping block they all knew exactly who to call -- the same man they called stupid when they thought their own marriage was rock solid.
I spent a lot of time trying to understand why them coming to tell me how worthless and stupid I was, seemed to be almost signing their own divorce papers. The best I could come up with, and was never sure of it, was that they were so confident their own marriage was rock solid, that they took their wives for granted. And, thus they were screwing up big time.
Your comment indicates you find the possibility of your wonderful, loving wife pulling the trigger on you to be impossible.
Well, you have a lot of company. The 1,600+ men I counseled were always the last to know. Their wife usually planned her divorce a long time until she had everything the way she wanted it. Her friends knew. Her siblings knew. Her fellow workers knew.
The only one that had no idea was DF, and it was a total surprise to him.
Up until the papers were served, he thought his life was his own taste of paradise and that nothing could change it. Just as you do.
I am well aware that not all men will be divorced. Simple statistics.
But, over the years tens of millions of men who thought their marriage was great, as you do, (because of their personal superiority to us dummies) ended up in the streets.
Let me add a second statement: Any man who is convinced his wife could never divorce him is (an idiot; insane; a DF - pick your favorite or add a better one).
Because only DF's can relax and be sure their wives will never divorce them, that is the reason any man who isn't working on an exit plan from the US is an idiot.
Anonymous age 68
Be sure to tell us again how wonderful your life is, and how you are sure you wife will never divorce you. Ha ha ha hee hee hee ho ho ho.
>>"Can I have your daughter?"
No. She'll make her own choice when she's ready.
July 13, 2010 8:52 AM
And, then 4 years later, she will divorce him.
Anonymous age 68
Age 68, if I'm reading you right your thesis is pretty much that no man can have a good life in the US, or be happily married to a North American woman. Am I right?
My life isn't "wonderful." I don't know anyone whose is. But it is good. I like my job and most of the people I work with. I have tenure and the house is paid for. I like most of my students. I love my wife of 16 years and mother of my three kids. Not anywhere close to your 35-year marriage but we might get there. Since I seem to have mislaid my Acme Corp. 100% accurate future-foretelling crystal ball, I don't know. I hope so. Yes, my wife could divorce me. I could divorce her. But so far things have been good. Could it change? Sure. Do I have an "exit strategy" if things turn bad? No. Does that make me a dumb fuck? If you think so, fine. I disagree. Even if it did happen I have no reason to pack up and move to another country. My life is here and I like it.
From your first post on this thread I gather that your early life wasn't too good and that you've had bad experiences with American women. I'm sorry. My early life was good, my teen years were good, my adult life has been good, and my experiences with women have been mostly good. That's what's shaped my attitudes and worldview. Not anyone else's. Do men get fucked over in divorce? Yes. Every day. Is it right? Sometimes. Sometimes not. I have a dumb fuck colleague whose marriage of 20+ years collapsed last year. One of the dumb fuck's flings gave him gonorrhea and by the time the little tart got around to telling him he'd already passed it on to his wife. He got royally screwed in the divorce. My cousin was a great husband and got screwed in the divorce anyway.
So far my life has been pretty good. Not "wonderful" but pretty good. I hope it stays that way. And yes, I have a good life in the US with my North American wife. It can happen.
And, then 4 years later, she will divorce him.
Anonymous age 68
Well said, only a fool would marry being a man.
Own choice when she's ready means after she's whored around for two decades (they start young!).
Hope is the enemy of revolution, or even lesser forms of action to bring about change. Those who spread hope in the face of hopelessness are not fighting on the side of change, their work ensures the status-quo.
Anon said:
Yes, this is truly a dumb fuck. You beat your wife and cheat on her, odds are she'll call a lawyer. Don't blame her. If she cheats, call one of your own. Marriage vows should be obeyed, and no, I'm not religious at all. I just believe in honor. I have no idea why this fool blamed you for his troubles. I hope you showed him a mirror and told him where to look for the truth.
I say:
In a traditional marriage the man is not bound to the wife, the wife is bound to him. For a man adultery is when her has sex with some other man's wife, not when he has sex with some other woman not his wife. This is the biblical way, but not the American way.
If you hit your wife she should not call a lawyer or the police but should better strive to obey you so as to not get hit, it is only because in america men are not a bloc but instead foolish individuals that take pride in the destruction of eachother that the woman can call on another man to aprehend or destroy her husband. This probably has it's roots in the melting-pot history of america where diffrent groups who hated eachother and had no attraction to eachothers daughters were mixed together in the same country, in the same neiborhoods. They always looked to destroy eachother.
For the sake of morality, it would be best if your daughter was abducted by one of those crazy mormons. Atleast then she would not become a whore. Since you will not yourself find a husband for her when she starts to get the urge to reproduce she will find her own men and many of them.
">>"Can I have your daughter?"
No. She'll make her own choice when she's ready.
July 13, 2010 8:52 AM
And, then 4 years later, she will divorce him.
Anonymous age 68"
Maybe. At 11 she's very much her own person and makes her own decisions. Quite the entrepreneur and pays her own iPhone bill. I hope that if she marries she'll marry well. If not then she'll divorce him. That's life. Or she may choose not to marry. She's herself and will make her own choices.
I hope for a good life for all my kids. I love them and want the best for them. But they are individuals and will be who they are. I have no right to control them so can only hope that my wife and I have raised them well enough to make good decisions. I don't have control over that though. Our oldest son is 14. Old enough to father children. I've had "the talk" with him and hope that it took. 14 can create children, but not be a good father.
I don't know if I've done it right. The Acme Corp. crystal ball would be nice but I don't know where to get one.
"but should better strive to obey you so as to not get hit"
You're not 68. But whoever you are you're sick. Go pound sand.
If your daughter divorces her husband I hope he kills her. Men are doing that more and more these days. They don't care, they know they are financially ruined once the divorce happens.
Basically, I hope your daughter either obeys or dies. And we all know she won't obey. She will divorce.
Women and girls should be forced to accept "bad marraiges".
She's 11? You should start to look for a husband that she can serve, some girls get irresistible urges at 12.
Sounds like you raised a bitch though. I've heard men who have been handed their papers killing not only the wife but the supportive in-laws aswell: they killed the wife, her aunts, her mother, her father. Almost like the nine-exterminations of Imperial China.
When your daughter divorces, you might feel the consequences of raising an independent bitch. She will divorce, you have admitted it.
Look at this scum: he cares about his own daughter rather than his fellow man. He's in it for himself and his only. He is the reason we have garbage wives. Whatever happens to him he deserves. Most American men are the same. They see their daughters as individuals rather than as gifts to give other men, so they in-turn can also be given another young bride.
Fighting against feminism is like pounding sand: the innumerable masses of women and ESPECIALLY men all support it. It is an unwinnable battle short of killing off all the middling intellect men of the western world (the dumb and the smart see that women's rights is not to their advantage, it's the middle intellects that can't see this and support feminism)
You're funny.
"Basically, I hope your daughter either obeys or dies."
I reiterate. You're sick.
"Women and girls should be forced to accept "bad marraiges"."
Let me guess. You're not exactly a chick magnet, are you. I wonder why.
"When your daughter divorces, you might feel the consequences of raising an independent bitch."
There are no words to express the depth of my terror. Yawn.
Go pound sand. Or see a shrink.
>>Age 68, if I'm reading you right your thesis is pretty much that no man can have a good life in the US, or be happily married to a North American woman. Am I right?
No, as often your type does, you change things to suit yourself.
I think I said rather plainly no one ever knows for sure his wife will never divorce him, nor do they usually see it coming.
A lot of divorced men were happily married until the sheriff handed him his papers, giving him 10 minutes to grab what he can from the house he will keep paying for.
Sixty percent do not end up divorced, and almost all of them imagine it is their personal superiority that kept them from being divorced, thus blame the men whose wives were stupid whores and dumped them for other men.
The few smart men who understand this will be making exit plans. The others are idiots.
Anonymous age 68
>>From your first post on this thread I gather that your early life wasn't too good and that you've had bad experiences with American women. I'm sorry.
There you go again, making up stuff. They give tenure for this level of intelligence???
I supplied counseling to more than 1,600 men and a few non-custodial women. Men who have the temerity to speak out against the abuses heaped on men face certain standard childish responses. We call them "shaming language."
In your case, your response quoted above is a subset of "you're just bitter because of your divorce." No room in your small world for men who learned by actually observing what happens to men around them, by one means or another, other than only by their own divorce.
You chose the example of the man who screwed around and caused his own divorce, because you want to believe men cause their own problems, right? If you live in the US, you could have used a large number of men who didn't screw around and the wife divorced him because she found another man with a bigger one. But, you chose the case you knew of where the man causes his own divorce. This is not the case most of the time.
Of course, college Ph.D.'s might be that much more stupid than average, so I might be wrong, and all the cases you know in the ivy covered tax payer supported halls might be panderers. I don't know that many of you, thank God.
Everything you say shows you are indeed suffering from, "I GOT MINE!!!" And, are incapable of basic understanding that men have no civil; legal; human; or constitutional rights today in the U.S. Nor, that you live in your own home only at the whim of that wonderful woman you are married to.
Anonymous age 68
>>"Women and girls should be forced to accept "bad marraiges"."
This response to July 14, 2010 8:44 AM, not the original poster of that statement.
We do have a sick man on this blog. He is not only sick, but admits it.
However, why is it so bad to say women and girls should be forced to accept bad marriages? Men by the millions are forced to accept bad divorces while people like you use shaming language on them if they dare to so much as complain.
Men like you are the enemy of men, not feminists.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
Charges are one thing. Convictions are another. By the time the black ties and agents of Satan in black robes of hell get done they will be acquitted.
Anon68 said:
In your case, your response quoted above is a subset of "you're just bitter because of your divorce." No room in your small world for men who learned by actually observing what happens to men around them, by one means or another, other than only by their own divorce.
I say:
He's a man of middling intelligence, what do you expect? He has never learned from observation: only by personal experience and by accepting whatever came out of the teacher's mouth.
Men like him are the reason that I cannot have the wife that I want.
Why won't he let a man marry his daughter? He shouldn't have even had a daughter since he won't marry her to a man and she won't be a slave. Men would not be inconvenienced if she never existed.
>>I hope that if she marries she'll marry well. If not then she'll divorce him. That's life.
Only in the Anglosphere.
For example in the Philippine Islands, one common destination for expats, there is no divorce at all. If your daughter made a big mistake on who she married, she would be forced to live with it. No pussy pass.
You have made it clear you have absolutely no knowledge of the male experience in the US, outside of your taxpayer supported ivy covered halls.
Divorce itself is not the problem, if men were treated correctly when a divorce happened.
Since you are well into your 40's, and haven't noticed a thing happening to other men by the millions, I am not going to explain in great detail. It is as big a waste of time trying to talk to DF's as it is to talk to feminists.
In the US, if a women divorces, the intent of the family court is that she continues to maintain her standard of living, which means the man must give his up altogether in most cases. Which also means she is divorced, but he isn't.
In Mexico, if she wants a divorce, she can have one, depending upon the state. But, the price she pays is she gives up his money except for half the actual cost of taking care of the kids.
IF HE IS EMPLOYED. If he isn't, there is no jail for him, as unemployed men in the US routinely face. Divorce means divorce, and that means giving up the benefits of marriage, including the money from the man one receives in marriage.
I realize exactly what you are doing. As is often the case with extremely ignorant people, you think in your extreme ignorance of the male experience, because you haven't personally experienced it, that you know much more than us poor sinners.
You know nothing about the male experience. Nothing about child support orders larger than a man's gross pay and judges who sneer and tell them to rob banks. Nothing about false sex abuse and rape charges. Nothing about false DV arrests. Nothing about men who are much more qualified but can't get jobs because of open discrimination against men.
Yet, here you are, expecting to teach us poor, stupid sinners the true path.
I gotta' ask again, they give tenure to people like you?
Anonymous age 68
Note to our tenured bundle of ignorance.
Over a ten year period of activism and research and counseling work, outside my paid employment, I spent an estimated ten thousand hours on this work.
(Just out of curiosity, just about how many hours of taxpayer subsidized activities did it take to get your wonderful Ph.D. that makes you think you are so superior, after you got your Masters?)
I not only counseled men. I also talked to divorced women friends so I did not lose track of the other side of the picture. I visited the governor's office at his invitation.
I read millions of words of appellate court rulings, and other court cases. I corresponded with other activists around the country.
I read ALR, and also state and Federal agency rulings. For some years, I was the only non-government employee in my region of my state who had a copy of the Child Support employees handbook and knew exactly what they were doing.
My statements which you sneer at, are based on what is really happening out there, not what an extremely ignorant person with a superiority complex IMAGINES is happening.
In the US, the legal; constitutional, civil; and human rights of men are ROUTINELY violated by both government agencies and the courts. A lot of lawyers openly admit it.
You clearly are ignorant of any of this. To put it bluntly, you are fighting out of your weight class. It is not smart to write about things you know nothing about. Your Ph.D. gets you no points outside the taxpayer supported ivy covered halls.
Anonymous age 68
>>(the dumb and the smart see that women's rights is not to their advantage, it's the middle intellects that can't see this and support feminism)
I'm not sure if that's right, but I like it!!!
Anonymous age 68
>>You beat your wife and cheat on her, odds are she'll call a lawyer. Don't blame her. If she cheats, call one of your own.
Bad advice.
If you beat her (I realize you have no clue, but in the real world women commit more domestic violence then men do) or cheat on her, and she calls her lawyer, you get tossed out of your house; she gets house; kids; car; child support in some cases greater than your gross income; alimony; property settlement; and you not only may not get to see your kids you are supporting; but may not even be allowed to know where they are living. In a few cases, the kid died and the man wasn't even told, and had to keep paying child support for a deceased child.
If she cheats (I notice with the extreme ignorance one expects in tenured Ph.D's you assume women never beat husbands) and you call the attorney, you get tossed out of your house; she gets house; kids; car; child support in some cases greater than your gross income; alimony; property settlement; and you not only may not get to see your kids you are supporting; but may not even be allowed to know where they are living. In a few cases, the kid died and the man wasn't even told, and had to keep paying child support for a deceased child.
It's called equality. And, any man in the US who isn't working on an exit plan is an idiot.
Anonymous age 68
"Everything you say shows you are indeed suffering from, "I GOT MINE!!!""
You seem to be afflicted by "if you disagree with me you're stupid, out of touch, and ignorant." I run into it at conferences on occasion. Academics can get very upset if colleagues disagree with them.
I'm glad you did counseling. Good for you. You did your homework. Good. You read and learned. Good. But you also seized on my example of an idiot colleague getting his just desserts and overlooked the other about my cousin who did nothing wrong but got screwed too. I was, in effect, agreeing with you on that point, that divorces can and do happen. Sometimes with just cause, sometimes not. Women also get screwed in divorces. Not as often, but it happens.
"My statements which you sneer at, are based on what is really happening out there"
Please point out where I sneer, instead of merely disagree. Your solution was to leave the US. I point out that it is perfectly possible to have a good life here, and you come unglued. "My way or the highway." I work with people who have gone on after a divorce to have good lives here in the states. A few neighbors too. By not following your lead, are they idiots? Should they have grabbed their kids and emigrated, both men and women?
"The few smart men who understand this will be making exit plans. The others are idiots."
All others? Everyone who doesn't want to pull up stakes, leave their family and friends, jobs, homes etc. to get out is an idiot? Should I get a preemptive divorce since my wife might divorce me? Yes, she could. I already agreed to that. I could too. If that happens I still don't want to leave family and friends. I get on well with my family and have many friends here in town. Could I get royally fucked over in a divorce? Yes.
"However, why is it so bad to say women and girls should be forced to accept bad marriages?"
That suggestion was made by the poster who thinks I'm scum for viewing my daughter as a person and not an object to be given away or traded like currency. He didn't say "people" should be forced to accept bad marriages, only women and girls. Sounds like bullshit to me.
I think divorce should be harder to get, so that people might think twice about marriage without really getting to know someone. That's what engagements are for and as I said above I believe in honoring promises. But, marriages do go bad and need to be gotten out of. Your wife is screwing around on you? She drinks and won't get help? She's a thief? She abuses the kids? Is a lazy bitch who won't lift a finger inside or outside the house? Or is just a royal pain in the ass whom you wish you'd never met? Why stick in a marriage like that? No reason at all. So if you're not advocating men being forced to accept that, and I don't see any reason why you would, why urge it for women? If the marriage is beyond repair, people, men and women, need to get out of it. Does the process need reform to be fairer to men? Yes. Twisted completely around to screw women over completely? No.
"I gotta' ask again, they give tenure to people like you?"
Yes.
"Men like you are the enemy of men, not feminists."
If you say so. I disagree but that automatically makes me wrong, doesn't it?
"Why won't he let a man marry his daughter? He shouldn't have even had a daughter since he won't marry her to a man and she won't be a slave."
I know you didn't write that, 68. I just wanted to laugh at it so it's tacked onto this post.
I can't marry her off, asshat. She's 11. And since she's a person and not property, when she's older she'll choose her own husband if that's what she wants. She won't be a slave? Got that right.
No, another mantra. You like most men want to minimize what is being done to men. Why?
Because it hasn't happened to you personally. You are not the first man to have that attitude. In fact, you are rather normal for the fools who today pass for men, which is why any man who isn't working on an exit plan is an idiot.
Seventy or more percent of divorce is filed by women, and most of the divorce has nothing to do with male misbehavior at all. She simply is bored in her marriage and wants a different man. Yet, you continue to repeat the same old crap about adultery and violence, thus attempting to blame men for their problems.
A study in the late 90's showed that most divorces filed by women did not at all involve any serious problem at all. No serious quarreling; no violence. They surveyed a significant number of women and asked how they rated their marriages.
Those who said they were very unhappy in their marriages were contacted five years later. Those who had taken the divorce route were still very unhappy.
Those who had decided to stay married now reported they were very happy. I am assuming a smart man like you can find that study. It took me 39 seconds.
I bet you can't explain that, can you? I can. I will give you a clue; it was something other than the husband's failure to be a good husband.
You have all the University PC. "Women have problems, too." Another face of the shaming language used to try to shut up men.
Sure, women have problems, too. (Mostly of their own making.) However, while you slept women took over this nation.
I watched a video last night, which listed the various agencies which help women. It scrolled and scrolled, and every agency received tax money.
So, how long was the list of agencies which help men? Hee, hee. There wasn't any, but the prison system to lock them in cages when they face a false sex abuse charge. Or, when they can't get a job because of brazen discrimination against more qualified men so dearies can get jobs, and are tossed in jail for not paying support money they don't have.
Every paragraph of your postings shows total ignorance of the male experience today. Yet, you presume to use childish university debating tactics to put me down.
It is obvious why you are here. You, the great savior of women, are here to put us poor sinners in our place, with your childish university debating tactics, PC., and shaming language.
Not too many years ago, that b.s. worked. Things began to change once the web really opened up communications between men who have been brazenly screwed by the system, all in the defenses of helpless; fragile; inferior dearies who still can't get by with the whole Federal Government; the state governments; the courts; the cops; the Army; the Air Force; the Marines; the Navy; all on their side, and we still have to listen to damned fools tell us, "Women have problems, too."
You don't have a clue.
Anonymous age 68
I went back and reviewed your last displayed posting. Your latest childish argument was I am saying what I am saying simply because you disagree with me.
More childish b.s. that only flies on the tax payer supported ivy covered campuses.
You self-labeled intellectuals want to believe that all opinions have value, and that we must respect those who disagree with us or our own arguments lose credibility.
Millions of men in the US today are fighting for their lives, and in too many cases losing.
There is a right and a wrong, and you are in the wrong. Not because you disagree with me, but because you have no clue no what is being done to men today.
And, what is being done to men today is flat wrong.
Their human; civil; legal; and constitutional rights are being violated by every court and agency in the nation, because the men there are as ignorant as you are -- or in some cases because they make money violating those rights.
Besides, they have this absolutely wonderful wife, and kids, and life is good, and any man who doesn't have the same just needs to try a little harder.
You get by with this nonsense on the tax payer supported ivy covered campuses. Beware of going out into the real world and feeding this b.s. to men who know better.
Anonymous age 68
(I am guessing next on his shaming language list is a lecture how one loses credibility when one shows anger. He has the whole list memorized.)
>>She won't be a slave?
It never occurred to those here who are not mentally disturbed that she was. Only men are slaves in the US today. That means men who must work for others with no benefits, which is the true definition of slavery. Millions of men go to work every day, if they are lucky to have a job, and have to send a large portion of their earnings to someone else from whom they receive no return benefits. And, if their employer lays off mostly men, they get sent to jail like any slave who failed to perform his duties.
Anonymous age 68
If there is a man willing to accept her you can marry her off. She'll soon be able to reproduce, and also will be pretty (the two go hand in hand). A man will accept her. Marry her off or she becomes a whore. Those are your options. No father has ever had anything other than those two options.
>Women also get screwed in divorces. Not as often, but it happens.
If my eyes are poked out, and then the person who blinded me also has their eyes poked out, I am still blind.
If your wife divorces you, enforce "till death do us part" (and not with your life).
>Twisted completely around to screw women over completely? No.
If men are to be happy, it must be.
Not every road must be a two way street.
Women and girls /should/ be screwed over: they were designed for it.
That should be their life: being screwed over by their husband, their master. It should begin once they can make babies. Not when they are mentally ready to "take charge". No one wants a bitch. Age without marraige makes a bitch.
>I can't marry her off, asshat. She's 11. And since she's a person and not property, when she's older she'll choose her own husband if that's what she wants. She won't be a slave? Got that right.
She might aswell have never existed then. She'll just be another dumb (or smart) whore. She won't be any man's servant. Her youth will be wasted (it's starting now or soon probably.)
Why would any man marry her at, what? 20? That's 1/2 way through her years of prettiness. She'll fall off at 26 or 28.
Why should we accept that? We want them young so they're pretty for longer.
I understand why men in america abduct girls who have entered or on the cusp of puberty. It is the only way in america for a man to have a shot at having the dream of a nice feminine wife fulfilled. I don't feel bad for the idiot american-fathers who lose their daughers this way: the role of a daughter is to be married off, if the father refuses , because he is a feminist or favors female liberation, the girl should be taken by some man and forced into a marraige by a man who likes her. Sure, eventually he will be killed, but he might get ten years of happiness with her, and then when the police and the dick of a man that is the father finds her and him he can have a stand-off with the police and shoot a few of them, and then die.
There's really no better way to live in the USA if you are a man. There's no other way to get a young wife.
It does mean death, but a man cannot live on bread alone, and bread is the only thing given in america. Not sweet companionship.
>>If my eyes are poked out, and then the person who blinded me also has their eyes poked out, I am still blind.
Yes, that is true. But the person who poked your eyes out won't be doing it to anyone else after SHE is blind.
In the US women are allowed to destroy a man with infidelity; perjury; and grand theft with government help. Then, since she has impunity, she can put on her best duds, paid for with money from her last victim, and go out hunting for another victim.
While all the Ph.D's say, "That's life."
Anonymous age 68
The funny part was eventually everyone of those men got his papers. And, when they did, guess who they called for advice? Um, you guessed. The minute their privates were on the chopping block they all knew exactly who to call -- the same man they called stupid when they thought their own marriage was rock solid.
I hope you told them to go pound sand.
From your first post on this thread I gather that your early life wasn't too good and that you've had bad experiences with American women. I'm sorry. My early life was good, my teen years were good, my adult life has been good, and my experiences with women have been mostly good.
Wait until that changes and them we'll see what attitude you have.
You know nothing about the male experience. Nothing about child support orders larger than a man's gross pay and judges who sneer and tell them to rob banks. Nothing about false sex abuse and rape charges. Nothing about false DV arrests. Nothing about men who are much more qualified but can't get jobs because of open discrimination against men.
Anon,this dumbfuck doesn't get it the best he could do when he gets divorced is put a gun in his mouth and pull the trigger that way we are through with a mangina dumbfuck.
>>I hope you told them to go pound sand.
Not when they called, MM. But, anything that much fun, why not do my best to help?
Actually, I quit counseling because I didn't think it was quite ethical to be counseling men when I was enjoying their misery that much.
After ten years of activism, and trying to help them, and encountering constant insults and stupidity like that of Dr. I Got Mine, something snapped, and the worse their story was, the happier I was.
I even joked with friends after ten years of insults from the f'idiots I was trying to help it was tempting to go help women destroy men, heh, heh.
That is also the reason I realized I had to Get The Hell Out. These idiots get to vote.
Life is not 'good' here in my Third World village. It is as close to paradise as we can get in this life.
Others might not think so, because the physical comfort and convenience is lower. But, the founders of the US talked about effeminate luxury. At my obvious not youthful age, I feel very masculine, as men do when they eschew that luxury.
Anonymous age 68
That should be their life: being screwed over by their husband, their master.
Does anyone take you seriously?
Why do you need to hit anybody?
Thank God for the sensible father of that 11 year old girl. He knows she is more than property to "married off". His hopes for her lie in getting her educated and able to care for herself. No, she will NOT be a whore unless "married off" at 11. That's paranoid and ridiculous.
Someone said:
His hopes for her lie in getting her educated and able to care for herself. No, she will NOT be a whore unless "married off" at 11. That's paranoid and ridiculous.
I say:
She will have sex with a few boyfriends, then dump them, and eventually get married in her 20s or 30s or never. Later she will divorce him
She will enjoy her life.
Hopefully the man she divorces will end it and also end the lives of her father, mother, aunts, etc, as is the growing trend amongst men who females do wrong to. Maybe she'll even get offed before then by one of the boyfriends. The men now understand that the whole family supports women's empowerment and thusly they all are collectively culpable and must be killed with her.
I hope you too get killed in a similar manner.
Men no longer care that they will die too: they do not believe in hell or heaven and do not want to live in the hell that is slavery or prison. You can't threaten men into submission anymore: they would rather die if they can atleast take you and your pro-women supporters with them rather than live a life of servitude or imprisonment or just unhappiness.
Every time one of your families is totally wiped out I am happy. I love it when a feminist-minded clan is murdered en masse. Often it is by burning (the man burns down their house while they sleep after killing the divorcing wife or leaving girlfriend.) I hope this trend continues into a low scale war and then becomes a civil war against men who believe in women's rights and their families.
I hope the strain of liberal thought that supports women's rights and girl's liberty dies, the only way to do that is to kill those who believe and practice it.
Bob: I am never going to have a nice young cute obedient wife that I want.
I cannot go overseas to get a wife either as the federal government will track me down and put me in jail for life for having sex with a young women under the age of 16.
Also any man can be held in the USA for life in civil confinement if he is deemed "sexually dangerous". Any man who catches the eye of the authorities who wishes to have a young virgin as a wife is "sexually dangerous".
I no longer wish to live.
How should I end my life?
I know women's rights will never end, I will never have what I want, so I wish to die.
What do you suggest.
...What do you suggest....
Why do you keep trying to get Bob's blog shut down, Mikee? He's the only one who gives you a forum and you repay him by trying to get him to commit online crimes. It is illegal to try and talk someone into suicide or to suggest it for them. Do you get that? Illegal. Just as when you try to get him to suggest acts of violence. That's illegal too. Read Bob's disclaimer. Bob is careful not to break the law. Quit trying to get him to. This is the only board where you can air your nutty rants. Stop trying to get it shut down like your own blogs have been.
Tell us, Mike, what is the actual difference between sex with a 12 year old, and a 20 year old?
You obviously don't know, because you have never had sex with any woman, as far as we can tell.
While I have not had sex with a woman under age 20, I strongly suspect with your eyes closed, few can tell the difference in sexual pleasure between a sex partner of 12 years vs. 20. I couldn't tell the difference between 20 and 27, though when a woman has kids, you can tell the difference, though it is still pretty darned good, not enough to change women over. At age 68, it can still be darned good, except the man has to be smarter than a rock to make it be good, which again you don't understand because you have never had it with any woman; any age.
And, if we make it the difference between age 14 and age 16, the latter being legal under US law affecting US residents overseas (except for prostitutes, in which case 18 is the minimum age) it would be impossible to know the difference.
The only likely difference is not sexual but visual. A 12 year old essentially looks like a little girl, even if she has reached puberty.
I know this, because a little girl who "adopted" me as a grandfather when she was a baby graduated from primary school Saturday, and invited me to the ceremony.
Her mom dressed her, in my opinion, in an inappropriate manner, with décolletage, at 12 years of age. Yeah, she looked great, but what she looked like was a sweet little girl all dolled up in an age-inappropriate dress.
So, the only reason a man wants a girl that young, since sex is going to be the same, is he wants sex with a little girl. And, yeah, mean, old folks don't tolerate that nonsense too well.
Mike, you obviously have no idea just how good sex is, with a woman of 20 or older, if she isn't a fat hog. If you did, you would put aside this sick, twisted obsession with pubescent little girls that you admit you can never have, and get a sex life with no jail time and no instant death.
I have a friend in the States whose brother hurt himself and got disability from the Fire Department. He took a tour to Thailand; came back; saved again; and took another tour to Thailand.
He came back, sold everything, and moved to Thailand.
She said he'd go walking down the street, and when he saw something nice, probably working construction because women do that in Thailand, ask her to be his woman, and usually she'd say yes, and he'd take her home. When she turned nasty, he'd kick her to the curb and go walking down the street until he saw another nice one.
She finally asked if I understood these girls were 16.
Now, he has had the same one since she was 18, and she has been there a long time. No lip. No sass. Still sweet in her 30's. I used her picture on my desktop for a long time.
Here's the problem, Mike. Some of the sickest men on the planet are those who have never had sex with a woman. They get major obsessions for all sorts of things, including rape/rape of little girls/torture/murder. It's amazing how often those guys never had consensual sex with a woman. Not all sexless men become criminals, but those who do become sick criminals often led solitary lives, and the only sex they had with women was evil and violent.
If we took a vote, most folks here would probably agree this sick obsession does indeed make you sexually dangerous. So, you called it well.
Anonymous age 68
>>No, she will NOT be a whore unless "married off" at 11. That's paranoid and ridiculous.
Or, realistic. The average US female today who manages to find a husband; any husband, which is fast becoming a miracle, has had 11 lovers. Spelled w-h-o-r-e.
I realize many of you grew up with that sort of promiscuity, so don't see any problem, right?
Of course, marrying at age 11 is not even conceivable, except in Mike's fantasies.
But, here you have a liberal Ph.D. father, who is such a lousy father his 11 year old daughter is already telling everyone what she is going to do. At age 11 those of us who were competent fathers, our daughters were still asking us questions and trying to find out what life was all about, because 11 year olds don't yet know what to do.
Our daughters thus did not become whores. His will. And, living in a university environment? She doesn't stand a chance.
It's not just a case of girls doing something we old stick-in-the-mud fogies don't like. Whores are not happy. They are miserable.
I tell men you can tell the AW from the Mexican women 30 feet away by the pissed-off look on the faces of the AW.
Men who have come to Mexico to see for themselves, report, "It's true!!!" Of course, it's true.
I'm sure Dr. I Got Mine thinks he is a wonderful dad. He is actually guilty of child abuse for not teaching the negative consequences of liberal lifestyles. "That's life," he says in regards to her perhaps getting divorced and permanently messing up her life and her kids' lives.
Anonymous age 68
>>Thank God for the sensible father of that 11 year old girl. He knows she is more than property to "married off". His hopes for her lie in getting her educated and able to care for herself.
Ah, I see the Canadian Feminist is back. How is Canada doing these days? Oh, yeah, I forgot, not very well without the US as a strong, viable, support base, and until the new health care plan changes it, a place to go when you are sick. Hint, once Obama has made the US health care system as bad as Canada's, Mexico is the place to go. Not the swamped public hospitals you hear about from the MSM, but the world's finest private hospitals.
He is not a sensible father; he's actually a fool.
In spite of your feminist beliefs which have brought so much suffering to women, most women actually want to be SAHM.
Your "educated and able to care for herself" training program essentially precludes what 66% of women want, which is to be a mommy at home with her babies. (Study late 90's after nearly 40 years of feminist indoctrination. You can take the girl out of the kitchen, but you can't take the kitchen out of the girl.)
A sensible father will want his daughter raised to be able to take care of herself UNTIL she finds a decent husband, then to be able to be a mom and wife who can stay married, and not say, "That's life" if she can't keep a husband as that fool did.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
Throughout history women divide themselves into 2 classes, wives and whores. Both earn their living with their pussies/wombs, but wives are moral.
Men create and produce all the housing, food, and other necessities of life that allows females to survive. Females use their pussies to be given a share of that wealth.
A father who guides his daughter away from a good life as a wife and mother is guiding her toward the life of a whore.
>>It is illegal to try and talk someone into suicide or to suggest it for them.
I'm curious if you can give me any hints on which laws, in which states, you are talking about.
I am not disputing what you say, because I don't know you are wrong. I am going to look for the laws to find out if you are right, but could use any help you can give me.
I do know there are laws in some states against any direct and active support in a person committing suicide.
But, I am not aware of any law which says it is a crime to tell Mike on the Internet to go ahead and whack himself. If I find it, I will share it with others here. Or, you can.
Anonymous age 68
Most of our male ancestors married and had sexual relations with young women under the age of 18. It was the norm for men who were older to have children with girls of the age of menarche: 13.5 on average. Did they have a sick obsession? They also didn't take any crap from these girls, they abused them by hitting them if they acted up and they had sex with them whenever they wished to: your male ancestors raped your female ancestors. How does that make you feel?
Today in poor muslim countries men often insist that their wives be no older than 13 on the wedding night. If the girls act up they get hit. They also are forced to perform sexual acts on their husbands weather they wish to do so or not. It is brutal malevolent sexual slavery for poor young women. The men absolutely love it and do not want anything to change. They see their society as a gift from God himself and compare ours to theirs and are happy with owning girls and women rather than having an abundance of inanimate objects.
As for mikee, what? I remeber reading that he died a little while ago, his obese corpse supporting whatever computing device he used to sling his shit onto everywhere. I think someone said he was in an asylum for the criminally insane when he died. I bet that cell stunk like shit, which is apt because mikee was shit, I think we all can agree on that.
Look, I'm not a law professor, or a psychologist. I don't know what your problem is or what the problem with the law is. I think that your rants are very long and concern sex a lot for some reason, it seems an obsession, talking about your personal life all the time. I do suspect that anything any man would ever want to do is illegal, however. That is how it often is in any society.
(...)
(...)
In America any man deemed "Sexually Dangerous" can be civilly committed for life. Any man that wants a young women able to have children under the age of 18 is sexually dangerous according to the men of all western countries.
The western countries and the men and the women who inhabit them are the enemies of men who would like to enjoy the natural pleasures of good young females. The western men, who are all proponents of women's rights, have conquered the world and are in the process of subjugating, on behalf of the women of the world, the rest of the male population on earth.
(...)
I did notice that bobs rhetoric has really radically toned down over the last few months. I also remeber reading one time that this blog was a collaborative effort, and I noticed the differences in styles and content that were present in diffrent blog posts. Most were about feminism in the past, and supported young marraige of girls, and minimized rape. Today most are about random political things, and young marraige of young women is no longer supported.
As for feeling during coitus: if that's all you see of value in a female just whack off. Young wives are valuable for other reasons. They can be molded or brainwashed, they will obey, they fear their husband and this brings out their femininity (weakness) that men revel in. They are when men dream about. If you just want feeling, become gay, you'll get lots of feeling that way.
As for criminals: the middling intellect accepts whatever lies and fables he is given, so long as .
The men who abducted virgin girls and forced them to be their wives, they are not criminals. It is the purpose of a daughter to be the good wife of a man. When fathers abdicate their duty of giving the daughter away in her early years, and allow her instead to do what she desires: that is be an independent whore (and that is what _all_ of the women in the liberated world are. _All_, because they can choose, and they do.), it is a permitted act for a man to take that girl as his own wife before she becomes a whore. The God of the old testament, or whatever men wrote that book recognized this. Bob did too. Now he is silent on such issues and just gives us political soft balls to discuss. He won't even respond to my emails, he used to.
(...)
And, if we make it the difference between age 14 and age 16?
Attitude, number of previous partners, some are even starting to fall apart at that young age due to drug and alcohol abuse. Attitude. Smarts. Experience. They have them. I've seen it.
At 16 they are more _WOMEN_ (or womyn). They know what they want and how to get it. They KNOW they are in control. Even men in muslim countries have problems when they marry 16, 18, etc year olds. The women have more demands, are more bitchy, it really makes them less attractive. Worst of all, they are confident. This is why they marry the younger girls. They want a beaten down horse, and by 16 and certainly by 18 that horse is standing up and is it's own person, especially if it hasn't been sold but instead has been giving riding lessons.
I want a beaten down horse too. 1/3rd to 1/2 of the population of men of any society always do. It might be a mental malady. The other 1/2 or 2/3rds of men in any society are good non-sexually-dangerous men. They are not-criminal. They want what is best for women and a partnership.
This is why it is only in corrupt countries where the 1/3rd seizes power where women and especially girls are basically enslaved to men. That can never happen in a democracy because most men are good honorable men who care above all about women.
Some men want a young female slave. These are the criminal sociopaths in a society. They are 1/3rd of any society and it requires a huge police force and education system to keep them in check.
Note to readers:
Recent comments have become to angry and argumentative. This is not a place for men fighting with each other. I have deleted several recent comments that are too much. Thank you for your participation.
Bob Private Message: could you forward the deleted comments that were not mine to my email? You probably only deleted mine though, as I was responding to Anon 68. Why don't you email me back anymore also?
>>The average US female today who manages to find a husband; any husband, which is fast becoming a miracle, has had 11 lovers. Spelled w-h-o-r-e.>>
The average US male today who marries has had 16 sex partners. How do you spell what he is? Or do you believe firmly in the double standard, Me Man You Obey thing?
>>Some men want a young female slave. These are the criminal sociopaths in a society. They are 1/3rd of any society>>
Do you have a citation for these figures? 1/3 of a society amounts to a lot of men in larger countries. Please show where you got that statistic and if possible, provide a link. Thanks.
I'm curious if you can give me any hints on which laws, in which states, you are talking about.
Minnesota to be specific; it can be prosecuted under the law forbidding assisted suicide. Look for other states who have similar laws, and also legislation (recent) against online bullying and/or persecution. Bob's on the side of good sense when he doesn't rise to Mikee's bait. And don't fall for the "Mikee died" shit. It's Mikee himself behind this latest shitstorm of unsigned raving.
As for mikee, what? I remeber reading that he died a little while ago, his obese corpse supporting whatever computing device he used to sling his shit onto everywhere. I think someone said he was in an asylum for the criminally insane when he died. I bet that cell stunk like shit, which is apt because mikee was shit, I think we all can agree on that.
Mikee is better than your feminazi ass is.
Go to hell feminist.
Ballzigger said:
The average US male today who marries has had 16 sex partners. How do you spell what he is? Or do you believe firmly in the double standard, Me Man You Obey thing?
Ballzanger responds:
The men in the old testament had lots of wives and concubines. I call him a successful man.
MikeeUSA died allright. We have photos of the immense body. We had it cremated because he did not deserve a proper burial.
We also discovered that MikeeUSA was working with law enforcement to try and entrap bob.
"Young wives are valuable for other reasons. They can be molded or brainwashed, they will obey, they fear their husband and this brings out their femininity (weakness) that men revel in. They are when men dream about."
Hi MikeeUSA, truly you are God's Greatest Gift to feminism. They love you. You try to convince yourself that you are the true voice of men and that real men share your sick obsessions. Feminists love that. All they have to do is point to your insane ravings and say "see? It's true. Men are all sick evil pigs who have to be removed from our lives and those of our children. See?"
You're not the voice of sane men. Where are all of your online supporters? Why do you get kicked off of every MRA site there is? Why don't thousands of posters rise up to echo your words?
Could it be because the MRA sites are trying to do something important and your happy horseshit plays straight into feminist fantasy? (Or should that be ponyshit?) Could it be that no other (sane) men share your views at all, much less the 1/3 to 1/2 of men you claim to represent? Could that be it, MikeeUSA?
Think about it. Every time you post one of your sickening screeds, a pony gets its wings.
>>I remeber reading that he died a little while ago, his obese corpse supporting whatever computing device he used to sling his shit onto everywhere.
You believe everything you read? It is presumed Mike wrote that himself, and a few weeks later, he was posting on a Saudi URL about young wives. Rumors of his death are greatly exaggerated.
http://lawschool.courtroomview.com/acf_cases/8728-people-v-campbell
"Incitement to suicide has not been held to be a crime in two-thirds of the states of the United States. In the states where incitement to suicide has been held to be a crime, there has been no unanimity as to the nature or severity of the crime. . . ."
To convict a person for inciting suicide, I think it would have to be shown that the person actually committed suicide (though in New York state the incitement itself is a crime even if the suicide doesn't happen) and that the comments were serious and led to the suicide.
In Mike's case, he has talked suicide for a long time. It would be hard to prove that anonymous comments on the Web actually incited it. Also, he has told many people to go burn themselves, etc.
Also, Bob has a service where they don't just cancel his blog when they get a complaint, without even checking it out.
>>As for feeling during coitus: if that's all you see of value in a female just whack off.
So, you also haven't had sex with a woman???
So, you thought men wanted women for their powerful, rational minds?
Yes, an ideal woman is one a man can talk to, can share things with, can enjoy doing things with. But, it doesn't fly unless she is also willing to participate in good sex. and her body is desirable. Before you waste your time on mantras, this is the equivalent of women not wanting to date unemployed men.
Worse yet, today the feminists have things so screwed up it is true millions of men don't want anything to do with women, except for sex. Women have had almost all the choices for decades, but men still get to decide not to have anything to do with women except under conditions that suit them. And, one thing they choose is what age women they want. If no woman in that age bracket wants them, they either can seek another age bracket, or Get The Hell Out, which is increasingly the best choice.
I have sex with my 68 year old wife, because she is my wife and hasn't divorced me for 35 years now. And, after all these years, I know how to make it good for both of us in spite of her age, and drastically reduced capacity of her body to give pleasure. But, if I were single again, I sure wouldn't start out with a 68 year old, nor do I know anyone else who would.
And, I don't have to. When women are young, they call the shots. When they pass their expiration date, they are on the other end of the stick.
Anonymous age 68
"...mikee was shit, I think we all can agree on that."
Yes, I think we can all certainly agree that MikeeUSA is shit. Even his parent/s would probably agree. Nobody has done as much harm to the MRM as Mikee.
"If you did, you would put aside this sick, twisted obsession with pubescent little girls that you admit you can never have, and get a sex life with no jail time and no instant death."
Women of 18 plus know that this society is their own, that they are the masters of it. They have had 4 to 6 years of practice manipulating young men (and older sometimes). They see men as fools. They no longer have the capacity to love a man, to obey him, to fear him, to be a good wife.
They are independent, they are used.
Men who accept their society, women's society, and play by women's (and GOOD MEN's) rules have aquieced to women's rights and privlege.
I would rather have a young wife for a week and then die in a gun battle, provided that I killed a few of the pro-women's rights forces that were battling me, and that I impregnated the girl, than live by the rules and demands of women and their allies.
I hate your civilization.
It gives me everything I could EVER want, except for allowing me to aquire a young wife unmolested, yet I hate it.
I want for no material possession, and still that is not enough.
>>The average US male today who marries has had 16 sex partners. How do you spell what he is? Or do you believe firmly in the double standard, Me Man You Obey thing?
That may be true. Mathematically. Average (arithmetic mean) is obtained by taking all the lovers men have, and dividing by the number of men, just as was done for women.
The problem is, most women have been sexually active, with most women having sex with a small number of men. Estimates run from 80/20 to 95/5.
The men most women sleep with, whether 5 or 20% have a tremendous number of lovers. Yes, they are man whores. The men most women want and will sleep with.
Thus, the 16 average lovers for men means a small percentage of men have had 100+ lovers.
But, most men have had 0 lovers, or maybe 1 or 2, one time. You whores call them losers, and that is most men. Not only most men, but the best men. The type who are responsible and would adore their wives. The type whores such as Rihanna said they want nothing to do with. Most men.
Women want men whores. They want men other women want and have had sex with. Thus, when the average woman has had 11 lovers, that means most women have had 11 lovers. They are mostly whores. Men do not want whores.
Go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68
>>>>Some men want a young female slave. These are the criminal sociopaths in a society. They are 1/3rd of any society>>
>>Do you have a citation for these figures? 1/3 of a society amounts to a lot of men in larger countries. Please show where you got that statistic and if possible, provide a link. Thanks.
There is no such statistic. Of all the men I have known in my life, Mike is the only one I have encountered who wants a child slave wife. I realize I don't know all the men but there aren't that many.
Aesop had a fable about this. It's the one about the fox who lost his tail.
Anonymous age 68
Whores, wives and CATHOLIC NUNS.
What does "act up" mean ?... to qualify a wife to get hit.
Is that not a relationship based on fear?
Note to anonymous;
A Catholic Nun is the wife of Jesus.
Note to MM:
Right on!
This guy must be an extraterrestrial
what human writes:
I hate your civilization.
It gives me everything I could EVER want, except for allowing me to aquire a young wife unmolested, yet I hate it.
I want for no material possession, and still that is not enough.
July 16, 2010 2:49 PM
"I would rather have a young wife for a week and then die in a gun battle, provided that I killed a few of the pro-women's rights forces that were battling me, and that I impregnated the girl, than live by the rules and demands of women and their allies."
Mikee, I think you're a little out of touch with reality. In the highly unlikely event you actually did manage to force yourself on a woman and successfully impregnate her it wouldn't mean a thing. She'd just pop into the nearest clinic and your would-be progeny would simply be scraped out and tossed in the trash. No matter what frustrated-toddler response you scream about burning or shooting or murdering her it wouldn't change the facts. There wouldn't be anything you could do about it.
In the meantime you're either dead or on your way to prison, probably prison since we know you don't actually have any of the weapons you dream about and are actually very passive and submissive. It really doesn't matter either way. Reproductive success is out of your league.
Dead sounds fine to me.
Who is this mikee character you keep talking about? Didn't that fat, retarded, insane slob die a week ago?
"Mikee, I think you're a little out of touch with reality. In the highly unlikely event you actually did manage to force yourself on a woman and successfully impregnate her it wouldn't mean a thing. She'd just pop into the nearest clinic and your would-be progeny would simply be scraped out and tossed in the trash. No matter what frustrated-toddler response you scream about burning or shooting or murdering her it wouldn't change the facts. There wouldn't be anything you could do about it.
In the meantime you're either dead or on your way to prison, probably prison since we know you don't actually have any of the weapons you dream about and are actually very passive and submissive. It really doesn't matter either way. Reproductive success is out of your league."
You're happy about that, aren't you.
You like it that women choose.
have aquieced
www.dictionary.com is your friend. All those big words that you think will make you sound like an adult instead of a frustrated toddler come off so much better if you can spell them.
You're happy about that, aren't you.
You like it that women choose.
In your case, yes.
"You're happy about that, aren't you.
You like it that women choose.
In your case, yes."
Why, and who are you?
Why women and girls have rights and power over themselves and men in america:
"
Re:The fact is, US is just as bad as China (Score:5, Insightful)
by spun (1352) writes: on Friday July 16, @04:00PM (#32931098) Journal
We do compromise on the basis of mutual consent. If you like the deal offered to you by your country, you stay. If you don't, you take your business somewhere else. Just as with any business you can not just walk in, demand what you like, and refuse to pay. What, exactly, do you deem 'tyranny?' I'm guessing tyranny means 'anything I don't want to do,' right? Well, that is not how society works, you do not get to dictate terms to the majority who have already agreed how things will work. You get to take the deal we offer you, or leave it and find a better deal. It is not our fault if the deal you want is not available in the world marketplace of governance."
Why, and who are you?
The "why" is pretty self-evident.
The "who" is simple. I'm myself. Just like everybody else on the planet.
>>MikeeUSA died allright. We have photos of the immense body. >>
Sure you do, Mikee.
Why do you choose to be the punchline to an unfunny joke instead of having a real life?
The "why" is pretty self-evident.
Explain it if it's so obvious, some of us are dense idiots. Come up with a fucking response.
Jesus is a dead man. No nun marries Jesus (maybe his teachings, religion, etc. but not him).
Why do you prefer blondes?
Dude, mikeeusa is dead, I've seen the body. Too bad he didn't suffer, it would have been good if he suffered.
Hey kids! Pop quiz time.
Fill in the blank questions:
1) A woman who has sex before marriage is:
2) A man who has sex before marriage is:
3) A 16-year-old boy who works with his adviser to take classes leading to college where he plans to be a meteorologist or other serious profession is:
4) A 16-year-old girl who works with her adviser to take classes leading to college where she plans to be a meteorologist or other serious profession is:
5) A woman who has a child outside of marriage is:
6) A man who fathers a child outside of marriage is:
7) A married man who has extramarital affairs is:
8) A married woman who has extramarital affairs is:
9) In the summer most kids have part-time jobs to earn money.
a) Girls should:
b) Boys should:
10) Bonus essay question: The ideal relationship between men and women is:
Hey, great idea. If there are any kids here, play with the feminist. The mental age might be under your age level, but what the heck.
Anonymous age 68
""The "why" is pretty self-evident.""
"Explain it if it's so obvious, some of us are dense idiots."
Apparently so.
"Come up with a fucking response."
All right, if you're really that dense.
Mikee, as long as women/girls can choose, none of them will choose you. You already know that. Never, no matter how much you cry, will a female choose to be with you.
Mikee, as long as women/girls can choose, you will not reproduce. This is for the best. I don't know what's wrong with you or what is the cause of it. It may be genetic, it may not. Either way, you have nothing to offer as a father. You have no job, no skills, no paternal instinct, nothing to teach or pass on as worthwhile. Nothing. A child "fathered" by you is automatically handicapped. It may inherit whatever is wrong with you. It may not. Either way, it would have to be raised by a single mother since you have no ability to be a father. You would be toxic to an infant. Best it isn't born or even conceived.
Is that a clear enough fucking response? In your case, Mikee, women/girls being able to choose is what's best for themselves, any potential offspring, for you, and for the world.
The life you've chosen for yourself is pathetic. And since you choose to abdicate any responsibility, you're powerless to change it. This is what you want MikeeUSA. Live with it.
Is that enough of a response for you, or are you too dense to understand it?
"Dude, mikeeusa is dead, I've seen the body. Too bad he didn't suffer, it would have been good if he suffered."
MikeeUSA suffers every day he's alive and sees women living the lives they please instead of being miserable slaves. It's pathetic but it's what he's chosen for himself so I guess he enjoys the suffering.
>>This guy must be an extraterrestrial
In my youth, the term was Space Cadet.
Anonymous age 68
>>Dude, mikeeusa is dead, I've seen the body. Too bad he didn't suffer, it would have been good if he suffered.
>>July 17, 2010 6:47 PM
So, link us to the obituary. Should be easy enough.
Anonymous July 18, 2010 3:57 PM
I did some extrapolative thinking a while back, and realized there was something about Mike that was only consistent with his knowledge that never, ever will he have a woman. Not just bad self-esteem or lack of social skills, but something major and permanent.
There aren't many such conditions.
I listed the three I could think of, something grotesque like the Elephant man; a total disability; or extreme obesity.
Even as he denied them, he accused me of hacking his account, which was rather Freudian. Heh, heh.
He later admitted a lot of stuff about himself, which you can find on past Blogs, probably the last one. One can't be sure because he has total disregard for the truth, but these made sense.
Since then, many of us regulars have attempted to avoid pulling his strings any more than we have to. Bob has tightened up on his most abusive personal attacks, so there is no real need to really clobber him now. That is also why I am not repeating the things he admitted, maybe, possibly, perhaps.
So, he has these fantasies. I suspect if he were able to do anything at all, he would be in an institution, because even he admits he would be labeled as sexually dangerous.
As far as his desires for a very young, sweet, submissive wife, that came out of the Gor books that were popular in some circles 25 years ago. So much better he had never encountered those books. I knew immediately where these fantasies come from.
The more pissed-off one gets, I think the happier he is. If you want to really hurt him, minimize the attention he gets.
And, you can't possibly tell him anything he hasn't been told thousands of times. He is what he is, and except for his ability to anger with his words,as far as we can tell he is impotent to harm anyone.
This is Bob's blog, Bob is King here, I am only telling you MY view of Mike. He has probably blasted me worse than anyone here, so I speak with some advanced knowledge.
Anonymous age 68
I believe that no one bothered to publish an obituary, why would they for that piece of shit?
"Is that a clear enough fucking response? In your case, Mikee, women/girls being able to choose is what's best for themselves, any potential offspring, for you, and for the world."
I can't speak for Mr Mikee, who I have heard is deceased, but I don't think women and girls being able to choose is good for the majority of men, it's good for the minority that they choose, and for the larger group of men that will happily accept a used woman who allready had her fun and is now cashing out cashing in.
"Is that enough of a response for you, or are you too dense to understand it?"
More clarification is necessary, you basically just cussed up a storm and yelled at the top of your lungs how women and girls don't want some dead guy, how they rule their own lives and you'd better deal with it. Why should any of us just deal with it? You also complained that said dead guy wasn't doing anything to change "it", what private army do you command?
"Anonymous age 68"
What's your deal? You seem to believe in women's rights when it benifits women but not when it harms them. Are you the anti-man? You seem to want the worst of all worlds for men. All your arguments against women's rights include "it's bad for women!" You hate ideas that give men power over women and girls.
Bob: why don't you respond anymore except to anon 68?
"If you want to really hurt him, minimize the attention he gets."
That's probably good advice. Let me see if I can articulate why he aggravates me so much.
I'm a Tea Partier. Yes, I know, I've heard and read it all. Fact is, most of us are sane. It's just that nutjobs get more press. For a rally where 5000 people are peaceful and willing to to listen to all sides, 5 or 6 with ugly racist signs or 100 or so that scream down the opposition get all the press and alienate god-only-knows how many other people who might otherwise have thought of joining us. Since the nuts sell more newspapers that's what most people associate with us.
A real opportunity was lost when the Party reacted so badly to the NAACP. What I would have done is say something like "yes, we do have a handful of stupid goobers who like to see themselves on the news. Since we still have the right of free speech, for now, there's nothing we can do about them. But we wish they'd STFU and quit attending. We don't much like them." It would have done a lot for our image, told some of these fools that they're hurting what they claim to support, and maybe let a lot of other sane people know that we're not the party of skinheads or nutty screamers.
Same with Mikee. For all the harm he does to the MRM he may as well be on Gloria Stienem's payroll. A lot of perfectly sane men have probably run across his hateful rants on MRA forums and decided they don't want to be a part of anything like that. Especially if they have daughters. What man who loves his daughter would want to be associated with Mikee or anyone he's with? Messages about equal treatment in the courts, ends to ruinous child support, assumptions that men are bad and always at fault drown in Mikee's ravings like our messages do in a handful of racist signs.
Yes, he's insane. It's just that like the racists, Mikee slimes the rest of us and may have driven some men away from the movement. And he gives the feminists lots of ammo when they claim that the MRM is all about turning back the clock to caveman days.
Okay, rant mode off now, and I'll try to ignore him. Thanks for listening.
The "sane", the reasonable, make no waves and realize no change. They adapt themselves to what is, rather than adapt the world to them.
Those who think Mr Mikee is too extreme don't actually want anything new or game changing for men.
All Mikee advocates is young marriage for young females, and end to the jailing of men on rape charges (and instead, if the young woman has never had a husband/boyfriend and is a virgin, giving her to him as a wife), and the removal of female political power.
What is there there that is not for a man to like? Young wives, total domination of the female by the man, no prison for having relations with her and keeping her as a good female servant.
Most men are content with whatever scraps of crap they ate given.
The crazy tea partiers should use the guns they bring to the rallies against the "good" "sane" tea partiers who hate them.
"Yes, he's insane. It's just that like the racists, Mikee slimes the rest of us and may have driven some men away from the movement. And he gives the feminists lots of ammo when they claim that the MRM is all about turning back the clock to caveman days."
Good, the resonable men are useless, it's good to rally all the cavemen rather than the "respectable" twits. And yes, we want your daughters, we want them to be our female slaves, from a young age. Think afghanistan. If you don't want that, if you want your daughter to be the torch-bearer of your family instead, it's good to run you out of "the movement". You're not going to get us what we want, you're the enemy.
The problem with men is that if you are too far "left" or "right" of them, or just slightly "left" or "right" of them they hate you. You are insane, unreasonable, belong in a mental hospital (and they'll try to put you there). I used to try to get along with those to the "left" of me (less extreme), but I now simply hate them when they hate me, I like those to the "right" of me however.
Note to anonymous (July 19, 2010 3:42 PM)
The problem with the NAACP calling someone "racist" is that the NAACP is inherently a racist organization. The goals, agenda, and purpose of the NAACP have been racist since its creation, and even its name is racist. When a racist organization calls someone else "racist" it needs to have its own racism tossed back in its face.
One big problem we have in the US is that the dinosaur media is also anti-white racist. CBS, CNN, NBC, ABC, NY Times, etc., are all very anti-white racist. They lie and support all the anti-white racism that promoted Obama for Pretender. They hate Tea Party members who are honest enough to speak about pro-black racism.
They can either be for racism, or against racism, but not both. They cannot be racist and opposed to racism at the same time. They only claim to oppose racism when it is a different color of racism from their own racism.
Instead of blaming the Tea Party, we should be blaming racist organizations like NAACP and CNN.
>>For all the harm he does to the MRM he may as well be on Gloria Stienem's (sic) payroll.
Anonymous July 19, 2010 3:42 PM
A lot of people make the same mistake. It is impossible to harm the MRM. We have no civil; legal; human; or constitutional rights already. How can it get worse? Only sleep-walkers are going to believe that speaking in soft, dulcet, politically correct tones is going to gain us one atom.
Though most of you young guys don't seem to know it, there has been a MRM for all 45 years of the feminist movement. And almost always the spokesmen comport themselves as gentlemen and speak in rational terms. And, when someone accuses them of being extreme, they immediately back-pedal to try to correct their image.
Look what it has got us. If you think as a man facing any woman anywhere you have any civil; legal; human; or constitutional rights, you are one scrod individual.
The post-bellum blacks made the same mistake. Even as their women were being raped with impunity, and their young men lynched because an insane white woman imagined they might have, gasp, looked at her, the black elders told the impatient young men, "Do nothing violent or rash, or we will lose credibility. Be patient. Our time will come."
In the 1960's young blacks said, "Enough! It's time to start killing those who harm blacks." Yeah, I know the blacks think King won them Civil Rights. He did not. The Black Panthers did. If you talk to blacks, they will tell you, "Yes, King motivated us to fight for Civil Rights." Yes, he did, but the blacks did not wrest Civil Rights away from evil, racist people like my family. Those people laughed at King as a caricature, I know, because I listened to them.
The Black Panthers scared the crap out of them, and they started privately admitting maybe they had better leave blacks alone. Blacks don't know this, not only because they weren't associating with evil, racist people but also because the MSM didn't tell them. Not that the MSM was associating with evil, racist people either.
Bob has a rule against naming a certain group of people in history, and this is his blog. So, I will beat around the bush. Another group of people also were put upon as blacks were, in another part of the world. And, their leaders also told them to not resist, to conduct themselves with dignity at all times. Millions of them were slaughtered, because of their leaders wonderful, dignified plan.
So, it is not new when men are told they must speak in rational, dignified, dulcet tones or lose all credibility. And, every year our (I should say your, because I am in Mexico) status deteriorates.
Only one of the original feminist goals is unmet, that goal is the 'termination' of 90% of all men on the planet, and they have been openly advocating this on the web for years, as you tell us we should dump Mike because he advocates something he admits he will never have.
Likewise, the TEA party does not have the same status as the MRM. How many people are calmly murdered with impunity each year because they are TEA party members? How many TEA party members are falsely accused of grave crimes each year and sent to prison, because they are TEA party members? How many Tea Party members are ordered to pay more money than they earn each year, then tossed in jail when they can't, because they are TEA party members?
The TEA party is fighting for certain political goals. The MRM, or at least those whose heads are where the sun shines, realizes we are fighting for our lives. And, large numbers are losing, driven to suicide, while you bleat about being nice.
Anonymous age 68
Not sure if part 1 took, blogger.com has been busted for days.
Anyway, part 2:
Everybody here knows Mike is sick. The feminists know Mike is sick. You know Mike is sick. Mike has admitted Mike is sick. He has nothing to do with the MRM. Anyone, whether you or feminists, who say he reflects badly on the MRM isn't in much better mental health than Mike is.
The left and the MSM know well most TEA party members are not like they accuse them of being. It is all simple political lies, hoping the public believes TEA party members are all crazy, racist people. So, no one should bother to change one thing because of it. If you do, they start new lies until they have you giving up, which is pretty much what the stupid Republican legislators have done in the last 15 years.
Anonymous age 68
>>>a few weeks later, he was posting on a Saudi URL about young wives.>>>
Do you have a link?
NAACP was founded not to "bash" Whites, but to overcome White racism that had devastated African-Americans since the early 1600s. It fought for social, legal and economic justice.
Google is your friend. If you input
Saudi mikeeusa
into the search box, it should take you 3 seconds to find it. It is good to learn to do a search before asking for links, like girls do. If you can't find it, that is a different matter, but men should not imitate girls.
It is not important. We all know what he believes, and we know why. The point is, he is not dead, stop spreading the b.s.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
Let's get honest. Racists always claim that "my views" are "right." The NAACP was founded and continues to be a racist pro-black, anti-white racist organization. You may believe that their RACIST prejudices promote "economic justice" (for blacks) but that too is racist since it focuses on "justice" for one race over another. Just yesterday a Dept. of Agriculture employee was fired for promoting anti-white racism at a NCAAP conference. The whole notion of the NAACP accusing someone else of "racism" is a complete joke.
Here: http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentID=2010020262084
"Feb 2, 2010, Shock as girl, 12, accepts aged husband. Saudi GGazette"
Old comment, mother fucker could well be dead. We can only hope and pray.
I cannot say I like it too much.
However, there is a greater issue here than a 12 year old girl who voluntarily agrees to marry an old man. In fact, two greater issues.
First, is sovereign nation status. The term Ugly American doesn't just mean fat, ugly North American female tourists, though that might well be true.
It also means Americans who are so filled with self-importance and arrogance that they believe their laws and culture must dominate the entire world.
Switzerland, with a long history of bank secrecy, was told it had to open secret bank records to the IRS or any US assets are subject to confiscation.
The US is one of, if not the only, nation which says it owns you no matter where you live. You still owe then taxes no matter where you live or work. And, they are also using more excuses to prevent citizens from leaving, gradually imitating pre-1989 Russia.
Banks all over the world are kicking their US citizen customers, usually expats, to the curb because of large IRS penalties against any bank in any nation, even if in compliance with their own laws, does not comply with US laws. This creates a major hardship for the expats. See comment above about Russia.
Mexico is in turmoil in an attempt to comply with insane US drug laws.
Even if you lawfully marry in another nation a girl under 16, the US says it will put you in a US prison for 15 years.
Most North Americans are too stupid to understand this. But, here in Mexico, unwed mothers are so stigmatized that pregnant girls sometimes commit suicide. Well, we can't have that, can we? You don't care how many men commit suicide after being destroyed by divorce, but one woman commits suicide, and knees start jerking all over town.
So, it is conceivable that a pregnant girl under 16 years of age could become a wife or concubine (a legal term here of a woman who is after while accepted socially as his wife, even if not legally) of an older man, and the whole family would let out a sigh of relief that the good man would take that "ruined" girl and make her his woman and care for her child.
The US says 15 years in prison, and they don't care that in the Mexican culture this was considered a good thing, and approved by the laws of Mexico. (Mexico is right on this, by the way.)
If you start studying history, you will realize that when a powerful civilization loses all respect for the culture; mores; and laws of other nations, it quickly becomes internationally recognized that that country MUST be conquered.
And, when that state is reached, it usually isn't long before that country IS conquered.
Anonymous age 68
Blogger still busted. Here is part 2.
I said there were two issues. The second is the artificial hatred for old men in the US. When society was sane, and it was assumed to be better for horny girls of any age to be married to a mature man, rather than being an unwed mother cranking out future convicts at taxpayers expense, it was not common, but also not really rare, for 13 - 15 year old girls to marry men in their 30's, and the men were considered good catches.
Women traditionally wanted older men. Maybe not 80, but 30's was fine. Today, the feminists, along with wimpy men, have convinced our society that it is okay for 13 year old girls to get knocked up by 13 year old boys who can't buy a pack of chewing gum without mooching off their parents. But, to marry a 30 year old man with a nice house and a good job, who can give her nice things girls want, while being lawfully married, and providing a steady hand for producing good kids, heavens to Betsy.
I do not ever encourage violating any laws. I am saying the society is sick, and has passed sick laws, based in this case on a hatred of men, but especially successful older men.
Instead of the most desirable husbands, older, mature men are viewed as perverts who belong in prison, not just for girls under 16, but under 25 or 30.
My age is well known. Here in Mexico, at least once a year, a female, average age so far around 21, makes it clear she wants my body. Not the gold-diggers and opportunists of standard shaming language, but young women who know me personally and like how I am. And, would prefer me to the boorish Mexican men.
The last one was a 21 year old cute married woman with two kids. I am sure if I told her, "Your lovely breasts are like melons, and I adore your kids. Come away with me to Xalapa." She'd say, "I'll be packed and ready two hours after my husband goes to work."
The point is, here the man himself is viewed as what he is, with age not being an important factor, assuming he is vigorous. Is anyone here stupid enough to think it especially matters the age of the penis that is going into that 12 year old's body next week?
By the way, the usual suspects are going to start the customary insults and shaming language. You can count on it. Go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68
Excerpts from the Saudi article:
A Buraidah girl, 12, sent shockwaves through the courthouse here when she said that she accepted her marriage to an 80-year-old man because she wanted to obey the wishes of her father...
...The marriage has caused a great deal of controversy in the Kingdom and resulted in widespread condemnation from local and international human rights activists.
...During the court session, she said: “The marriage took place with my consent and I accept him as my husband in obedience to my father.”...
...He said the girl was still a child even though she appeared to be physically mature...
Sexually mature girl, who says in obedience to her father she wants to marry the man who made her and her family rich. Actually, she is already married to him, she is agreeing to be his wife. I bet she knows what is coming and can handle it. She might even like it. even women who are raped at times report having had an orgasm.
Also, there is not much evidence of any outrage except by international journalists, and English speaking feminists.
It's okay if a 12 year old girl in the US has a baby, which ends up on death row, and the taxpayers have to support the whole mess. We no longer put sexually active young girls in reform school, which means we allow children to make the decision to be sexually active with other children and to bear children, but we sure can't have them make the decision to be sexually active with a lawful husband.
No, that is not an exaggeration. That is exactly what US laws say, and we are trying to force those sick laws on the entire world.
To save the PC idiots some typing, if I had my choice all girls would wait for sex until they married at some mature age. That is not what is happening. The average girl has had 11 lovers before marriage, and average age for the first one is like 16, which means a lot of them are active with consensual sex at 12 or 13. So, we aren't protecting them from anything. All we are doing is putting more males in prison. What a sick society!
Anonymous age 68
That 12 year old who "accepted" her father's choice of a "husband" had NO CHOICE HERSELF. Had she protested this forced rape/slavery (a.k.a. Islamic Marriage), she would have been whipped or tortured into submission.... possibly beheaded.
Any man who applauds such a scenario, should come forward and show his face, his true name and address.
"We no longer put sexually active young girls in reform school"
We didn't jail sexually active young boys in reform school. Girl got pregnant, so they were the only ones punished. The boys who were also responsible for the pregnancy walked away. Now everyone does. I suppose that's progress of some sort.
"Any man who applauds such a scenario, should come forward and show his face, his true name and address."
Why? How would we profit from doing that? We know we'll never get the wives we wish to have. You'll just try to have us arrested or persecuted in some way if we "came out".
Being a straight man who want's an obedient young virgin as a wife is as dangerous as being a gay man in the 1200s: you will be imprisoned or killed.
Oh and, yes, I do support the 12 year old girl, who is capable of bearing children, being forced into a marraige with an 80 year old man. I am sure the man is very happy and that is all that I care about. Female happiness and men's fulfillment often cannot coexist together in full. I hope the man forces himself upon the young lady every night of their life together, and every day aswell. I hope this form of "islamic extremism" spreads through the world and also destroys those who opposes the enslavement of young women.
" That 12 year old who "accepted" her father's choice of a "husband" had NO CHOICE HERSELF. Had she protested this forced rape/slavery (a.k.a. Islamic Marriage), she would have been whipped or tortured into submission.... possibly beheaded. "
Good. I hate female choice. I will not tell you who I am or where I live. What are you going to do about it.
Hooray for men oppressing young women. I am very happy that this is still sanctioned in some areas of the world, I hope it spreads.
I am not telling you my information. What are you going to do about that?
Any man who applauds such a scenario, should come forward and show his face, his true name and address.
That would be MikeeUSA who is currently pretending to be dead. His name is posted elsewhere. He won't show his face or address, which is probably the most intelligent thing he's ever done.
>>We didn't jail sexually active young boys in reform school
No, we did not, you are right.
However, you seem to be confused by revisionist history, so I am guessing the Canadian feminist is here.
What we did if a girl got pregnant was poke a 12 gauge shotgun up their butts, and tell them they had a choice. Marry her or die.
Feminists, even male feminists, are stupid. If they weren't stupid, they would not be feminists.
They assume people still do bad things the same, when there are negative consequences for doing bad things. This is false. One girl in 1950 gets sent to reform school for f'ing, most of the girls around her decide in advance not to f'k.
Also, if boys were sexually active, it was with adult women, cougars in todays words, not other 13 - 17 year old girls. In today's words, pedophiles, though I disagree with this. Pedophiles do not have sex with sexually mature boys and girls.
One young man gets a shotgun poked up his butt and forced to marry a slut, the other young men tended to keep it it in their pants.
But, listening to stupid feminists, you didn't know that, did you?
There were other lessons given as well. My Aunt Kate was an excellent old woman. In her young adulthood, she became mistress to a married man, and had a couple kids. After he moved on, my dad went to visit her and the kids one Christmas day with some oranges for the kids.
Not only were there no Christmas presents. There was no food at all in the house. Over fifty years later, telling my brother the story, he cried. He took care of her for a long time and somehow she found a man to marry her, which was rare in those days. But, she did have a happy personality.
She buried two husbands, and the third one buried her.
Women like that were used as lessons for other girls.
No, we did not have 40% of young women shelling out illegitimate kids and suffering like that because mean, cruel men wouldn't help them. They got the message! And, there was little of such nonsense, and our prisons were small.
Stupid feminists are a pain. The good news is they are so stupid it is easy to expose them as stupid.
Anonymous age 68
>>Any man who applauds such a scenario, should come forward and show his face, his true name and address.
July 21, 2010 10:57 AM
Like you did? Because some stupid feminist who does not show her name and address tells him to? Go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68
>>" That 12 year old who "accepted" her father's choice of a "husband" had NO CHOICE HERSELF. Had she protested this forced rape/slavery (a.k.a. Islamic Marriage), she would have been whipped or tortured into submission.... possibly beheaded. "
Can't read, or just can't understand what you have read? The news item actually implied very strongly the judge was surprised at her willingness to consummate the marriage, which certainly hinted that he had thought to cancel the marriage contract until she indicated she wanted to be his wife.
You just made that s**t up, didn't you?
Anonymous age 68
I know where Mike lives. Why should I tell? He is not a danger to anyone, or he'd be locked up. His local cops would take him away if they didn't know he is all talk and nothing more.
Having a lot of trouble with the First Amendment, huh?
Anonymous age 68
Any man who applauds such a scenario, should come forward and show his face, his true name and address.
We disagree with feminists and any feminist that doesn't like that should provide their true name and address.
Female happiness and men's fulfillment often cannot coexist together in full
I know this is Mikee. But he still raises an interesting point. This one time he's right. Quite often what women want directly contradicts what men want. Historically men have had the ability to force things their way, sometimes making women's lives very bad while making men's very good. When what men want and what women want are in opposition who should have what they want.
Yes, notice how even the saudi judges are willing to bow to female choice and wishes. Patriarchy never existed, it's just the sick fantasy of lonely and over sexed men. Good men the world over make sure it stays that way. Usually those in law-enforcement are good men as their sole job is to punish other men. They protect women.
Note to readers:
It is appropriate for young women to follow their father's advice and guidance regarding marriage. Fathers use the wisdom and experience of many decades to consider all parts of a good future for our daughters. A father considers the economic means of the man who wants his daughter as wife and not just current fleeting lust. The best husband is often a man who can afford to raise his grandchildren well and endow them with a measure of wealth. Marriages are also important for uniting families and forming long term alliances between clans. The young woman's lust is only one factor, and not a very important factor.
A young women should be thankful that her father loves her and guides her in her life choices.
>>Patriarchy never existed, it's just the sick fantasy of lonely and over sexed men. Good men the world over make sure it stays that way.
That Canadian Feminist never gives up.
Patriarchy did exist. That is why Western civilization reached the highest level in the history of the planet.
And, that is why as Patriarchy is being destroyed by man-hating feminists, and wimpy men who help them, society is falling apart, and our prisons are full.
Most feminists, and present company is not excepted, don't even know what patriarchy is. I have heard the perfect violent, primitive matriarchy of Papua, New Guinea, described by feminists as patriarchy.
Anonymous age 68
>>They protect women.
You lost me there. Why does anyone need to protect women? Women are strong and independent, and can do anything men can do.
Or, do you really believe that women are fragile,and weak and inferior and cannot survive without male protection?
So, which is it?
Anonymous age 68
Physically weaker, but not mentally. Samuel Colt made all humans equal. A woman can pull the trigger just as easily as a man (all women should be armed).
It is appropriate for young women to follow their father's advice and guidance regarding marriage.
Does this mean we should follow our mother's advice and guidance about marriage? I guess so, but I hope not.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/21/MNMN1EHB37.DTL&tsp=1
Note to anonymous (July 22, 2010 9:38 AM):
Females generally don't get involved in a fight. Females usually stand aside until the battle is over and then fuck the winning man.
Note to anonymous (July 22, 2010 10:49 AM):
It is appropriate for young women to follow their father's advice and guidance regarding marriage. Their mother's advice is usually wrong.
Note ot anonymous: (July 22, 2010 12:57 PM)
Mr. Williams needs to learn better gun control.
There are many men in Oakland who are angry about the blue gun thugs murder of civilians. It would not take much to start a revolution.
Physically weaker, but not mentally. Samuel Colt made all humans equal. A woman can pull the trigger just as easily as a man (all women should be armed).
That would be like giving Al Qaeda a nuke.
>> Physically weaker, but not mentally. Samuel Colt made all humans equal. A woman can pull the trigger just as easily as a man (all women should be armed).
July 22, 2010 9:38 AM
Not mentally weaker? Gosh, I didn't know that. Is that why 95% of all patents in history were issued to men?
And, is that why almost all high i.q. people are male?
Wow! This is good stuff. Tell us more.
Anonymous age 68
Bob, I went to visit a friend in the hospital today and had a bit of a revelation, I think. I'm in my 50s and am still not used to female clergy, but that's who I stood next to in the elevator. Complete with dog collar and black suit and I assume she was there to minster to one of her flock. It dawned on me that that's why the pro-life movement isn't having as much effect as I'd like, and I've been active in it since the 70s. The leadership is largely male, since we believe in traditional values. But it occurs to me that young women today don't recognize male moral authority. For those that still attend church, odds are good that their minister is female or that they know one. Women serve in the Supreme Court, are senators and governors, doctors and other authority figures that once were exclusively positions for men. Young women look around and don't see men as someone to automatically look up to anymore. At pro-life rallies I've been told to "get back to me when you get pregnant" or "quit trying to control my body, you freak" or once even "hey pal, the Dark Ages are that way. Until you get them back I'm a person, not property."
That's how young women see it. The pro-abortion side successfully framed it not as whether women should kill their babies, but as neanderthal men trying to control them.
I suppose I should have realized this long ago. Many of these women were raised in single-parent households and may never have met their own fathers, much less learned to listen to his advice. They see women in positions of authority all around them and for them, it is perfectly normal and the way it always was. Now I wonder if my time in the pro-life movement has done more harm than good. They don't look up to men anymore. The feminists have successfully cast it has men trying to control them, not as killing their children. I don't know what to do now, whether I should stay in the fight or withdraw.
I find it very simple. Women should have the same rights and limits they demand for men.
Which is, you play, you pay, no way out ever, period.
However, your question is good. It is a waste of time on the fight you are involved in. God will deal with them in His own time and His own way.
And, sometimes he does that by letting people have their own way.
When it happens, you want to be as far away as you can get. Which is why I am here in Mexico. Think about my Get The Hell Out program.
Anonymous age 68
>> Physically weaker, but not mentally. Samuel Colt made all humans equal. A woman can pull the trigger just as easily as a man (all women should be armed).
July 22, 2010 9:38 AM
Physically and mentally weaker, you mean.
However, that is so well known, by both men and women,that I need not beat a dead horse. Most of the anti-male, slave laws feminists have passed for men have nothing to do with physical things. The only one is DV, and women initiate most of that, because they are incapable of impulse control.
If men were not bigger and stronger than women, the human race would not exist today. That's how violent women are.
When my grandson was born 4 years ago next week, the female nurse told my SIL, "It is your job to protect this baby from his mother." She was not joking.
As far as women carrying guns, in the Evil Patriarchy women did not need to carry guns. Their father told them when and where and with whom it was acceptable for them to go, so they weren't exposed to the violent trash they prefer to jump in bed with today.
The Modern Woman wants tough guys. Most men, like at least 80%, are what is called Nice Guys.
That means men who want to succeed; who by hook or by crook, attempt to get a career or to start a successful business so they can support a family. The type who believes in treating women with respect and courtesy. The type who might bring a date flowers. The type who asks permission before kissing a woman because that is what he has been taught to do. The type who wants to be primary bread winner for his wife and children.
Also, the type who gets no sex at all, until some skank who has bedded 100 men reaches 30 and decides it's time to have babies; tosses out her slut clothes; buys Christian Dearie clothes; goes to a Fundamentalist Church and joins the singles group, and renews her long gone virginity, then marries just long enough to get her babies,then cashes out and goes back to Butch the Dumpster Diver with a big weekly check in the mail.
You feminists tend to date ghetto bums of whatever convenient race, then conclude all men are violent, worthless bums.
Yet, you sneer at Nice Guys who would treat you like a queen. That is, if you are under 40 pounds overweight and their stomach will stand the sight of you.
Losers, you call them. Even Amy The Advise Goddess says any man who asks permission (which is what we are taught from birth) before kissing a woman is a LOSER.
Anonymous age 68
"
Yet, you sneer at Nice Guys who would treat you like a queen. That is, if you are under 40 pounds overweight and their stomach will stand the sight of you.
Losers, you call them. Even Amy The Advise Goddess says any man who asks permission (which is what we are taught from birth) before kissing a woman is a LOSER."
They are losers. Who is it that supports state violence against men, enforcement of feminist laws, draconian punishments for rape and domestic violence against women? Nice guys. They get what they deserve. They suffer from the laws which they support when thinking it will only be used on the bad men.
...Their father told them when and where and with whom it was acceptable for them to go...
Just like you'd treat a small child. I can't think why adult women would find this insulting. I guess they're just funny that way.
When US society does finally collapse -- and make no mistake, it will -- American women will be in a world of pain. There will be hell to pay, and the first order of business will be to punish those women (and their male lackeys) who actively supported feminism.
Still, society will be beset by problems even after the feminists have been thrown out of power. Those problems are deeply rooted in the Enlightenment, i.e., secular principles of democracy and individual rights underpinning western society. You might say the west faces a philosophical problem -- a problem that, in many ways, led to the catastrophe of feminism and "gender equality."
Please don't misunderstand; I am not pushing religion. But if this fundamental problem is not addressed, and if corrections are not made, we will again expose ourselves to fatal weaknesses such as what we're experiencing now with feminism.
Mr. Anon
>> They suffer from the laws which they support when thinking it will only be used on the bad men.
July 23, 2010 11:48 AM
This is true. So, what are you going to do about it?
I have been since the late 70's working to inform men that it DOES affect them. I encounter a lot of stupids, but since about 1995, the number of men who have figured it out has grown considerably.
I think it was 2004, not sure, a study showed that 22% of single men in the US said they will never under any circumstances marry. The two main reasons were insane laws, and the 40% divorce rate for first marriages. And, free sex for most men.
It is obvious the number of men who are at least avoiding marriage is growing by leaps and bounds. So, yes, they are figuring out the laws do harm them.
My solution is simple, and I am living it, instead of just whining on anonymous blogs. The answer is to go nations where the enforced laws are different. Too many whine that the laws are the same everywhere, and the feminists are happy to try to convince them of that. It is not true, but anyone stupid enough to know what life is like in Mexico without ever visiting here, deserves everything bad that happens to him.
In the 90's, I think it was 1995, MONEY magazine did an article stating that for the first time in the history of the US, a significant number of people (Other than former immigrants who went home when they retired) were leaving the US for a better life elsewhere. I think at the time it was 250,000 a year, I have not been able to verify it, but someone told me it is running a million now.
Anonymous age 68
1. >>>> Physically weaker, but not mentally. Samuel Colt made all humans equal. A woman can pull the trigger just as easily as a man (all women should be armed).
July 22, 2010 9:38 AM
2. >>...Their father told them when and where and with whom it was acceptable for them to go...
>>Just like you'd treat a small child. I can't think why adult women would find this insulting. I guess they're just funny that way.
More evidence of mentally weaker.
The men, at least most of them, here don't need an explanation, because they are mentally stronger, but since the feminist is here, I'd better explain.
On the one hand, you go places so stupid that you believe you should carry guns around and shoot anyone who frightens you.
And,there should be a steady stream of men going to prison, their lives destroyed, at great expense to the taxpayers, because women are doing stupid things and going stupid places. But, to tell a woman, "Don't go there, f'idiot" means treating them like little children.
WOMEN ARE TREATED LIKE LITTLE CHILDREN BECAUSE THEY INSIST ON ACTING LIKE LITTLE CHILDREN.
A few years ago, I sat down and calculated as best as I could the cost to this nation of taking care of mentally weaker women who did stupid things, and then someone, everyone has to stop what they are doing and bail them out.
Including the cost of supporting women who choose to raise future convicts at taxpayer expense. And, the money taken from men to support women who had every reproductive choice but chose to have kids at someone else's expense.
My estimates showed that women doing stupid things is responsible for most public outlays in the US, and perhaps private outlays as well.
Yet, mentally weaker women thinks the only issue is not being told what to do. Whatever they do, scummy old men are to stand back, and watch, billfolds in hand, while women act like mentally weaker children, then pay whatever it costs to fix whatever she breaks.
It's over. The US is out of money, and isn't doing anything productive.
Anonymous age 68
ANON 68, do you have a patent?
Women can rarely take advanced courses in engineering, physics, etc.
Bob's hero, Marc Lepine, made it clear that any such student will be shot immediately. Somewhere out there, Lepine's twin brother is waiting.
"When US society does finally collapse -- and make no mistake, it will -- American women will be in a world of pain. "
Men will be in worse.
>>ANON 68, do you have a patent?
July 23, 2010 6:06 PM
No, but I have a brain, unlike you, and have been at this for well over 40 years.
Anonymous age 68
>>Women can rarely take advanced courses in engineering, physics, etc.
>>Bob's hero, Marc Lepine, made it clear that any such student will be shot immediately. Somewhere out there, Lepine's twin brother is waiting.
Personally, I do not advocate violence. Never. It is too easy for men who are not cowards to Get The Hell Out.
Now.
But, the women in charge are trying to stop men from leaving peacefully.
The only reason Castro's government is still in power after well over 50 years is because he is smarter than the average tyrant, and let those who wanted to leave, to leave.
The women in charge of the US aren't smart. You can be sure there will be more and more laws keeping men from leaving as the numbers of expats continues to explode.
Every man who wants to leave and is stopped from leaving is a future Marc Lepine.
If women were smart, they'd have an Exit office, to help, perhaps even subsidize those men who want to leave, instead of making it hard.
I suspect the Castro government will still be there after ours is gone.
Anonymous age 68
>>"When US society does finally collapse -- and make no mistake, it will -- American women will be in a world of pain. "
Men will be in worse.
July 24, 2010 7:25 AM
Interesting theory. I don't see that, but would like to see the scenario you visualize for men when the system collapses.
When there are no black robed spawn of Satan issuing court orders to destroy men. When there is no large police force to attack innocent men. When there is no child support collection system. When there is no DV system with billions of dollars. When there is no welfare system to pay whores for having kids with no husband, or to abandon their husbands.
Tell me why you think it can be worse for men than for women. Sounds like a feminist fantasy worse than our child bride participant. But, you might know something we don't. Tell us, please.
Anonymous age 68
"Women can rarely take advanced courses in engineering, physics, etc.
Bob's hero, Marc Lepine, made it clear that any such student will be shot immediately."
I think someone forgot to tell the women. Go to your local collage or university and look in the classrooms. There are many women in them, including engineering and physics.
"Sounds like a feminist fantasy worse than our child bride participant."
Yep, young woman as brides is a feminist fantasy, only men having it worse than women after the collapse is a worse fantasy!
There is nothing feminist about marrying girls off once they are able to have children (usually at age 12 to 14). It is good for men.
Only an american conservative could confuse these things. (American conservatives are not.)
>>Only an american conservative could confuse these things. (American conservatives are not.)
This seems to be a valid personal opinion within the range of freedom of speech Bob encourages in his comments section.
But, I must wonder, how and where and when did you develop the ability to evaluate conservatism?
Anonymous age 68
>>>Women can rarely take advanced courses in engineering, physics, etc.
Bob's hero, Marc Lepine, made it clear that any such student will be shot immediately. Somewhere out there, Lepine's twin brother is waiting.
July 23, 2010 6:11 PM>>>
Where do you get this crap Mikee? There are no restrictions on what women can or can't take in college. They take whatever courses they want and there's nobody waiting to shoot them. Do you just make this shit up or what?
>> Where do you get this crap Mikee? There are no restrictions on what women can or can't take in college. They take whatever courses they want and there's nobody waiting to shoot them. Do you just make this shit up or what?
July 25, 2010 4:25 PM
Interesting. I did not think it was Mike who posted that comment. I may be wrong, but it sounded more like the Feminist, the one who voluntarily associates with men so evil she thinks all women need to go armed at all times. Unless someone 'fesses up we will never know for sure.
Anonymous said...
,"When US society does finally collapse -- and make no mistake, it will -- American women will be in a world of pain. "
Men will be in worse.
July 24, 2010 7:25 AM
Yes, men will suffer, very likely even worse than women. But that is not the point.
Pain is a very good educator, and women have a far lower tolerance and threshold for pain than men. Pain will eventually teach women that they will not and cannot survive without a relationship of dependency with men.
No matter what happens to men, women will not be able to avoid the realization that, without men, they are utterly helpless and clueless to get out of the mess they will soon find themselves in.
Mr. Anon
>>without men, they are utterly helpless and clueless to get out of the mess they will soon find themselves in.
Women have always been clueless to get out of the messes they are in. Except on a tropical isle with plenty of breadfruit trees, women do not do well without men.
The problem is, they are so spoiled in the Anglosphere, for so many generations, that they don't notice the many things men have created and maintained for them. Which is almost everything above cave dwelling.
They take it all for granted, like the air they breathe and the clouds in the sky.
If they buy a house with their over-paid affirmative action income, they think they made the house themselves by paying for it. The thousands of MAN-hours of work making it don't register on their narcissistic brains.
If a car breaks down, they think, "I had it fixed!" Which means they paid a male mechanic. They think the paying makes it happen, and the male mechanic's years of study and experience aren't important.
So, if the system collapses, they are going to be miserable. Those who live more than a week.
However, I realize men are going to have more pain DURING the collapse, they already are. And, our kind, caring empathic sisterhood cares not a whit.
I don't get why you think men will see more pain after the collapse. I am not saying they won't. I want to understand.
The only thing I can think of is men will be killing each other for food for their women, whereas women, if their man is killed, will need to spread 'em for a bigger, stronger man who will add her to his harem.
Any other scenarios?
Anonymous age 68
"Where do you get this crap Mikee? There are no restrictions on what women can or can't take in college. They take whatever courses they want and there's nobody waiting to shoot them. Do you just make this shit up or what?"
Why do you blaim old deceased Mikee for that comment, clearly it is not even in his style of writing,
Anon 68, did you build your own house or have some other men do that for you? Did you construct your own car or computer?
Many women would happily die.
"Interesting. I did not think it was Mike who posted that comment. I may be wrong, but it sounded more like the Feminist,"
I assume it is Mikee because of the absurdity of the statement. "Women can rarely take advanced courses in engineering, physics, etc." No, they can if they want to. Who else but Mikee is crazy enough to think that a mass murder in 1989 that has not been repeated changed anything about how women take classes?
Here's more about Lepine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_lepine A classic loser. Rejected by the military for his mental state. Unable to complete courses to do anything worthwhile. Couldn't hold a job due to his attitude. Blamed his mother for his father's abuse, but took his mother's name to avoid association with even his father's surname. Blamed women for his own failure in life. Killed a few people then himself. Accomplished absolutely nothing in life or death. I can see where Mikee would relate to him, but nobody else would.
Since Lepine's 1989 spree, there don't seem to have been waves of men inspired to follow in his footsteps. Women take whatever classes they want, including engineering if they're capable of it, which Lepine apparently wasn't. Women didn't take his spot; he didn't have the requisite coursework to get in. There was a guy 5-8 years ago who stormed an Amish schoolhouse and killed only the girls, but somehow I don't think that was about feminism. Not among the Amish. Last year or the year before some nutcase shot up a women's gym because he thought he'd been rejected by 30 million women, but I think we can agree he was just plain crazy. There was the Korean-American loony at V-Tech a few years back, but he shot everybody, and had a background of serious mental problems.
Who but Mikee would think that loser Lepine accomplished anything at all? I don't see the Canadian feminist thinking that, or any feminist. But I might be wrong about that.
A quick correction. Lepine did accomplish one thing. He's the poster boy for Violence Against Women legislation and has probably done a lot to get it passed in various countries. Nice work, Marc.
Lepine's twin brother is waiting.
Let's wish him success in carrying out his mission.
The canadian feminist is at it again, spewing random garbage about nothing and painting with a broad brush. Old dead mikee's schtick was to wish young girls were enslaved into marriage, he never mentioned anything about female inability to comprehend engineering and science: He was SO fucked in the head that he thought they should be married off to pedophiles even before they had a CHANCE to take up science or math! I'm glad he's gone though, really stunk up the MRM.
>>Why do you blaim old deceased Mikee for that comment, clearly it is not even in his style of writing,
I think I noted that. Sorry if I didn't.
Anonymous age 68
Post a Comment
<< Home